Discussion:
Everyone knows God exists... even hard core Atheists... Ro.1:18-20
(too old to reply)
Info
2014-08-23 14:00:03 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@4ax.com>
ΒΆ <> wrote:
Zzzz.
Steve
2014-08-25 00:57:08 UTC
Permalink
the atheist has conditioned himself to suppress the knowledge of God within himself as
we read in v.18 and following of Romans chapter one... he's his own worse enemy hating the fact that
God has exposed his inner, secret thoughts making such... public knowledge.
.
They expose their own thoughts making it known that they believe God does
not exist, yet most of them are ashamed of and want to deny that belief even
after they have made it clear that they have it.
Spam.
m***@.not.
2014-08-29 19:56:26 UTC
Permalink
the atheist has conditioned himself to suppress the knowledge of God within himself as
we read in v.18 and following of Romans chapter one... he's his own worse enemy hating the fact that
God has exposed his inner, secret thoughts making such... public knowledge.
.
They expose their own thoughts making it known that they believe God does
not exist, yet most of them are ashamed of and want to deny that belief even
after they have made it clear that they have it.
Spam.
It's a fact that the majority of atheists I've encountered who clearly
appear to believe God does not exist, are ashamed to admit it. VERY few have not
been ashamed to admit it. By your own response to what I pointed out you make it
clear that you are ashamed of the situation yourself.
Wisely Non-Theist
2014-08-29 21:41:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@.not.
It's a fact that the majority of atheists I've encountered who
clearly appear to believe God does not exist, are ashamed to admit
it.
The majority of atheists who are honest enough to admit to being
atheists are not ashamed to admit not believing any gods exist.

It is only those hypocritical closet-atheists who pretend to be theists
because of family pressures or social pressure who do not publicly admit
their real beliefs.
m***@.not.
2014-09-03 22:51:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wisely Non-Theist
Post by m***@.not.
the atheist has conditioned himself to suppress the knowledge of God within himself as
we read in v.18 and following of Romans chapter one... he's his own worse enemy hating the fact that
God has exposed his inner, secret thoughts making such... public knowledge.
.
They expose their own thoughts making it known that they believe God does
not exist, yet most of them are ashamed of and want to deny that belief even
after they have made it clear that they have it.
Spam.
It's a fact that the majority of atheists I've encountered who clearly
appear to believe God does not exist, are ashamed to admit it. VERY few have not
been ashamed to admit it.
The majority of atheists who are honest enough to admit to being
atheists are not ashamed to admit not believing any gods exist.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists want
to dishonestly deny that they have any belief.
Post by Wisely Non-Theist
It is only those hypocritical closet-atheists who pretend to be theists
because of family pressures or social pressure who do not publicly admit
their real beliefs.
I don't recall having encountered anyone like that, but I've encountered
several atheists who have made it clear they believe God does not exist, and
then have later tried to deny having any belief. What's in question is why they
are ashamed of their own belief instead of content with it, if not proud of it.
The idiot child bilgat is ashamed of his belief but goes on to an even more
idiotic position trying to persuade people that he somehow found out God does
not exist. He amusingly and very stupidly wants people to believe that his own
personal belief, or guess, is somehow "knowledge". Hilarious!
Post by Wisely Non-Theist
Post by m***@.not.
By your own response to what I pointed out you make it
clear that you are ashamed of the situation yourself.
Ralph
2014-09-04 00:19:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Wisely Non-Theist
Post by m***@.not.
the atheist has conditioned himself to suppress the knowledge of God within himself as
we read in v.18 and following of Romans chapter one... he's his own worse enemy hating the fact that
God has exposed his inner, secret thoughts making such... public knowledge.
.
They expose their own thoughts making it known that they believe God does
not exist, yet most of them are ashamed of and want to deny that belief even
after they have made it clear that they have it.
Spam.
It's a fact that the majority of atheists I've encountered who clearly
appear to believe God does not exist, are ashamed to admit it. VERY few have not
been ashamed to admit it.
The majority of atheists who are honest enough to admit to being
atheists are not ashamed to admit not believing any gods exist.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists want
to dishonestly deny that they have any belief.
Post by Wisely Non-Theist
It is only those hypocritical closet-atheists who pretend to be theists
because of family pressures or social pressure who do not publicly admit
their real beliefs.
I don't recall having encountered anyone like that, but I've encountered
several atheists who have made it clear they believe God does not exist, and
then have later tried to deny having any belief. What's in question is why they
are ashamed of their own belief instead of content with it, if not proud of it.
The idiot child bilgat is ashamed of his belief but goes on to an even more
idiotic position trying to persuade people that he somehow found out God does
not exist. He amusingly and very stupidly wants people to believe that his own
personal belief, or guess, is somehow "knowledge". Hilarious!
Post by Wisely Non-Theist
Post by m***@.not.
By your own response to what I pointed out you make it
clear that you are ashamed of the situation yourself.
Hate to burst your bubble, but absence of belief isn't belief.
m***@.not.
2014-09-05 18:44:28 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 03 Sep 2014 20:19:56 -0400, Ralph <***@yahoo.com> wrote:
.
Post by Ralph
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Wisely Non-Theist
Post by m***@.not.
the atheist has conditioned himself to suppress the knowledge of God within himself as
we read in v.18 and following of Romans chapter one... he's his own worse enemy hating the fact that
God has exposed his inner, secret thoughts making such... public knowledge.
.
They expose their own thoughts making it known that they believe God does
not exist, yet most of them are ashamed of and want to deny that belief even
after they have made it clear that they have it.
Spam.
It's a fact that the majority of atheists I've encountered who clearly
appear to believe God does not exist, are ashamed to admit it. VERY few have not
been ashamed to admit it.
The majority of atheists who are honest enough to admit to being
atheists are not ashamed to admit not believing any gods exist.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists want
to dishonestly deny that they have any belief.
Post by Wisely Non-Theist
It is only those hypocritical closet-atheists who pretend to be theists
because of family pressures or social pressure who do not publicly admit
their real beliefs.
I don't recall having encountered anyone like that, but I've encountered
several atheists who have made it clear they believe God does not exist, and
then have later tried to deny having any belief. What's in question is why they
are ashamed of their own belief instead of content with it, if not proud of it.
The idiot child bilgat is ashamed of his belief but goes on to an even more
idiotic position trying to persuade people that he somehow found out God does
not exist. He amusingly and very stupidly wants people to believe that his own
personal belief, or guess, is somehow "knowledge". Hilarious!
Hate to burst your bubble, but absence of belief isn't belief.
I'm well aware of that but I'm also aware of something that you appear to be
unaware of, which is that believing God does not exist IS belief. Your brother
the idiot child bilgat not only has great faith that God doesn't exist, but his
faith is so strong and pure that he believes he somehow "knows" God doesn't
exist. He can't give any good explanation as to how he could have possibly found
out, but he claims to have found out none the less. So do you agree with that he
did find out, or do you want to dishonestly try to pretend he has an "absence of
belief"? See if you agree with him or not:

"Just as You know that superman does not exist I can
tell you with the same assuredness that god does not exist" - ***@m.nu

"if you are reffering to the fact that I know there is no god" - ***@m.nu

"I have admitted numerous times that I *KNOW* there is not god. On this planet
or any others for that matter." - ***@m.nu

"I myself as an anti theist in fact {know} there is no god<s>." - ***@m.nu

"Atheists know that there is no god except the one that has formed out of
delusion that only lives inside your head." - ***@m.nu

"yes I do know that god is not and never was and never will be
anything other than a figment from those whom are less educated and/or
much more stupid" - ***@m.nu

"Oh actually I can explain exctaly how I know.. And I can even explain
how I found out." - ***@m.nu

"I "found out" I got my decoder ring in the mail one day and used
it when I looked at the bible and it said god was not real....." - ***@m.nu

"I have all the evidence I willl and any other atheist will ever need...
do you want to hear it?

Harry Potter is not real." - ***@m.nu
Free Lunch
2014-09-05 19:29:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Ralph
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Wisely Non-Theist
Post by m***@.not.
the atheist has conditioned himself to suppress the knowledge of God within himself as
we read in v.18 and following of Romans chapter one... he's his own worse enemy hating the fact that
God has exposed his inner, secret thoughts making such... public knowledge.
.
They expose their own thoughts making it known that they believe God does
not exist, yet most of them are ashamed of and want to deny that belief even
after they have made it clear that they have it.
Spam.
It's a fact that the majority of atheists I've encountered who clearly
appear to believe God does not exist, are ashamed to admit it. VERY few have not
been ashamed to admit it.
The majority of atheists who are honest enough to admit to being
atheists are not ashamed to admit not believing any gods exist.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists want
to dishonestly deny that they have any belief.
Post by Wisely Non-Theist
It is only those hypocritical closet-atheists who pretend to be theists
because of family pressures or social pressure who do not publicly admit
their real beliefs.
I don't recall having encountered anyone like that, but I've encountered
several atheists who have made it clear they believe God does not exist, and
then have later tried to deny having any belief. What's in question is why they
are ashamed of their own belief instead of content with it, if not proud of it.
The idiot child bilgat is ashamed of his belief but goes on to an even more
idiotic position trying to persuade people that he somehow found out God does
not exist. He amusingly and very stupidly wants people to believe that his own
personal belief, or guess, is somehow "knowledge". Hilarious!
Hate to burst your bubble, but absence of belief isn't belief.
I'm well aware of that but I'm also aware of something that you appear to be
unaware of, which is that believing God does not exist IS belief.
Not believing that any gods exist is not a claim that they do or do not
exist, merely a failure to be persuaded in the absense of evidence.
Post by m***@.not.
Your brother
the idiot child bilgat not only has great faith that God doesn't exist, but his
faith is so strong and pure that he believes he somehow "knows" God doesn't
exist. He can't give any good explanation as to how he could have possibly found
out, but he claims to have found out none the less. So do you agree with that he
did find out, or do you want to dishonestly try to pretend he has an "absence of
"Just as You know that superman does not exist I can
"I have admitted numerous times that I *KNOW* there is not god. On this planet
"Atheists know that there is no god except the one that has formed out of
"yes I do know that god is not and never was and never will be
anything other than a figment from those whom are less educated and/or
"Oh actually I can explain exctaly how I know.. And I can even explain
"I "found out" I got my decoder ring in the mail one day and used
"I have all the evidence I willl and any other atheist will ever need...
do you want to hear it?
m***@.not.
2014-09-10 18:47:16 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 05 Sep 2014 14:29:48 -0500, Free Lunch <***@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Ralph
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Wisely Non-Theist
Post by m***@.not.
the atheist has conditioned himself to suppress the knowledge of God within himself as
we read in v.18 and following of Romans chapter one... he's his own worse enemy hating the fact that
God has exposed his inner, secret thoughts making such... public knowledge.
.
They expose their own thoughts making it known that they believe God does
not exist, yet most of them are ashamed of and want to deny that belief even
after they have made it clear that they have it.
Spam.
It's a fact that the majority of atheists I've encountered who clearly
appear to believe God does not exist, are ashamed to admit it. VERY few have not
been ashamed to admit it.
The majority of atheists who are honest enough to admit to being
atheists are not ashamed to admit not believing any gods exist.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists want
to dishonestly deny that they have any belief.
Post by Wisely Non-Theist
It is only those hypocritical closet-atheists who pretend to be theists
because of family pressures or social pressure who do not publicly admit
their real beliefs.
I don't recall having encountered anyone like that, but I've encountered
several atheists who have made it clear they believe God does not exist, and
then have later tried to deny having any belief. What's in question is why they
are ashamed of their own belief instead of content with it, if not proud of it.
The idiot child bilgat is ashamed of his belief but goes on to an even more
idiotic position trying to persuade people that he somehow found out God does
not exist. He amusingly and very stupidly wants people to believe that his own
personal belief, or guess, is somehow "knowledge". Hilarious!
Hate to burst your bubble, but absence of belief isn't belief.
I'm well aware of that but I'm also aware of something that you appear to be
unaware of, which is that believing God does not exist IS belief.
Not believing that any gods exist is not a claim that they do or do not
exist,
"The gods of the theists who bother us here don't exist, even in non-god
form." - Free Lunch
Post by Free Lunch
merely a failure to be persuaded in the absense of evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Your brother
the idiot child bilgat not only has great faith that God doesn't exist, but his
faith is so strong and pure that he believes he somehow "knows" God doesn't
exist. He can't give any good explanation as to how he could have possibly found
out, but he claims to have found out none the less. So do you agree with that he
did find out, or do you want to dishonestly try to pretend he has an "absence of
"Just as You know that superman does not exist I can
"I have admitted numerous times that I *KNOW* there is not god. On this planet
"Atheists know that there is no god except the one that has formed out of
"yes I do know that god is not and never was and never will be
anything other than a figment from those whom are less educated and/or
"Oh actually I can explain exctaly how I know.. And I can even explain
"I "found out" I got my decoder ring in the mail one day and used
"I have all the evidence I willl and any other atheist will ever need...
do you want to hear it?
Free Lunch
2014-09-10 22:54:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Ralph
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Wisely Non-Theist
Post by m***@.not.
the atheist has conditioned himself to suppress the knowledge of God within himself as
we read in v.18 and following of Romans chapter one... he's his own worse enemy hating the fact that
God has exposed his inner, secret thoughts making such... public knowledge.
.
They expose their own thoughts making it known that they believe God does
not exist, yet most of them are ashamed of and want to deny that belief even
after they have made it clear that they have it.
Spam.
It's a fact that the majority of atheists I've encountered who clearly
appear to believe God does not exist, are ashamed to admit it. VERY few have not
been ashamed to admit it.
The majority of atheists who are honest enough to admit to being
atheists are not ashamed to admit not believing any gods exist.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists want
to dishonestly deny that they have any belief.
Post by Wisely Non-Theist
It is only those hypocritical closet-atheists who pretend to be theists
because of family pressures or social pressure who do not publicly admit
their real beliefs.
I don't recall having encountered anyone like that, but I've encountered
several atheists who have made it clear they believe God does not exist, and
then have later tried to deny having any belief. What's in question is why they
are ashamed of their own belief instead of content with it, if not proud of it.
The idiot child bilgat is ashamed of his belief but goes on to an even more
idiotic position trying to persuade people that he somehow found out God does
not exist. He amusingly and very stupidly wants people to believe that his own
personal belief, or guess, is somehow "knowledge". Hilarious!
Hate to burst your bubble, but absence of belief isn't belief.
I'm well aware of that but I'm also aware of something that you appear to be
unaware of, which is that believing God does not exist IS belief.
Not believing that any gods exist is not a claim that they do or do not
exist,
"The gods of the theists who bother us here don't exist, even in non-god
form." - Free Lunch
The fact that we don't bother trying to decide of the entire set of all
possible gods do or do not exist does not affect the fact that the gods
preached by the theist fools who waste our time in alt.atheism do not
exist.

When you find some evidence to support a god, get back to us.
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
merely a failure to be persuaded in the absense of evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Your brother
the idiot child bilgat not only has great faith that God doesn't exist, but his
faith is so strong and pure that he believes he somehow "knows" God doesn't
exist. He can't give any good explanation as to how he could have possibly found
out, but he claims to have found out none the less. So do you agree with that he
did find out, or do you want to dishonestly try to pretend he has an "absence of
"Just as You know that superman does not exist I can
"I have admitted numerous times that I *KNOW* there is not god. On this planet
"Atheists know that there is no god except the one that has formed out of
"yes I do know that god is not and never was and never will be
anything other than a figment from those whom are less educated and/or
"Oh actually I can explain exctaly how I know.. And I can even explain
"I "found out" I got my decoder ring in the mail one day and used
"I have all the evidence I willl and any other atheist will ever need...
do you want to hear it?
m***@.not.
2014-09-13 15:57:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Ralph
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Wisely Non-Theist
Post by m***@.not.
the atheist has conditioned himself to suppress the knowledge of God within himself as
we read in v.18 and following of Romans chapter one... he's his own worse enemy hating the fact that
God has exposed his inner, secret thoughts making such... public knowledge.
.
They expose their own thoughts making it known that they believe God does
not exist, yet most of them are ashamed of and want to deny that belief even
after they have made it clear that they have it.
Spam.
It's a fact that the majority of atheists I've encountered who clearly
appear to believe God does not exist, are ashamed to admit it. VERY few have not
been ashamed to admit it.
The majority of atheists who are honest enough to admit to being
atheists are not ashamed to admit not believing any gods exist.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists want
to dishonestly deny that they have any belief.
Post by Wisely Non-Theist
It is only those hypocritical closet-atheists who pretend to be theists
because of family pressures or social pressure who do not publicly admit
their real beliefs.
I don't recall having encountered anyone like that, but I've encountered
several atheists who have made it clear they believe God does not exist, and
then have later tried to deny having any belief. What's in question is why they
are ashamed of their own belief instead of content with it, if not proud of it.
The idiot child bilgat is ashamed of his belief but goes on to an even more
idiotic position trying to persuade people that he somehow found out God does
not exist. He amusingly and very stupidly wants people to believe that his own
personal belief, or guess, is somehow "knowledge". Hilarious!
Hate to burst your bubble, but absence of belief isn't belief.
I'm well aware of that but I'm also aware of something that you appear to be
unaware of, which is that believing God does not exist IS belief.
Not believing that any gods exist is not a claim that they do or do not
exist,
"The gods of the theists who bother us here don't exist, even in non-god
form." - Free Lunch
The fact that we don't bother trying to decide of the entire set of all
possible gods do or do not exist does not affect the fact that the gods
preached by the theist fools who waste our time in alt.atheism do not
exist.
Present your evidence, not just the possibility you've put your faith in.
Post by Free Lunch
When you find some evidence to support a god, get back to us.
You lie about the evidence you are presented with, yet have no
clue...LOL...what sort of evidence you think there should be. It's still amusing
just describing your position.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
merely a failure to be persuaded in the absense of evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Your brother
the idiot child bilgat not only has great faith that God doesn't exist, but his
faith is so strong and pure that he believes he somehow "knows" God doesn't
exist. He can't give any good explanation as to how he could have possibly found
out, but he claims to have found out none the less. So do you agree with that he
did find out, or do you want to dishonestly try to pretend he has an "absence of
"Just as You know that superman does not exist I can
"I have admitted numerous times that I *KNOW* there is not god. On this planet
"Atheists know that there is no god except the one that has formed out of
"yes I do know that god is not and never was and never will be
anything other than a figment from those whom are less educated and/or
"Oh actually I can explain exctaly how I know.. And I can even explain
"I "found out" I got my decoder ring in the mail one day and used
"I have all the evidence I willl and any other atheist will ever need...
do you want to hear it?
Free Lunch
2014-09-13 16:08:16 UTC
Permalink
...
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
"The gods of the theists who bother us here don't exist, even in non-god
form." - Free Lunch
The fact that we don't bother trying to decide of the entire set of all
possible gods do or do not exist does not affect the fact that the gods
preached by the theist fools who waste our time in alt.atheism do not
exist.
Present your evidence, not just the possibility you've put your faith in.
Define your god for me so I can show you that your god does not exist.
Until you offer a well-defined god, there is nothing to discuss. Not
only is it too vague to be useful, but some theists will keep redefining
their god to make excuses for why their prior definition made it
impossible for that god to exist.
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
When you find some evidence to support a god, get back to us.
You lie about the evidence you are presented with, yet have no
clue...LOL...what sort of evidence you think there should be. It's still amusing
just describing your position.
You have never offered any evidence. You know that. I have never lied
about any evidence that has been presented because we all know that
there has never been any evidence presented to show that any god exists.

I expect you to make more excuses and offer absolutely no evidence
because that has been your game plan up to this point.

...
m***@.not.
2014-09-18 21:22:41 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 13 Sep 2014 11:08:16 -0500, Free Lunch <***@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
.
Post by Free Lunch
...
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
"The gods of the theists who bother us here don't exist, even in non-god
form." - Free Lunch
The fact that we don't bother trying to decide of the entire set of all
possible gods do or do not exist does not affect the fact that the gods
preached by the theist fools who waste our time in alt.atheism do not
exist.
Present your evidence, not just the possibility you've put your faith in.
Define your god for me so I can show you that your god does not exist.
To me the minimum would be a being not native to Earth that had deliberate
influence on the way life developed on this planet.
Post by Free Lunch
Until you offer a well-defined god, there is nothing to discuss. Not
only is it too vague to be useful, but some theists will keep redefining
their god to make excuses for why their prior definition made it
impossible for that god to exist.
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
When you find some evidence to support a god, get back to us.
You lie about the evidence you are presented with, yet have no
clue...LOL...what sort of evidence you think there should be. It's still amusing
just describing your position.
You have never offered any evidence.
You have never asked for any evidence.
Free Lunch
2014-09-18 22:25:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
...
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
"The gods of the theists who bother us here don't exist, even in non-god
form." - Free Lunch
The fact that we don't bother trying to decide of the entire set of all
possible gods do or do not exist does not affect the fact that the gods
preached by the theist fools who waste our time in alt.atheism do not
exist.
Present your evidence, not just the possibility you've put your faith in.
Define your god for me so I can show you that your god does not exist.
To me the minimum would be a being not native to Earth that had deliberate
influence on the way life developed on this planet.
So your god is trivially unimportant. Fine.
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Until you offer a well-defined god, there is nothing to discuss. Not
only is it too vague to be useful, but some theists will keep redefining
their god to make excuses for why their prior definition made it
impossible for that god to exist.
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
When you find some evidence to support a god, get back to us.
You lie about the evidence you are presented with, yet have no
clue...LOL...what sort of evidence you think there should be. It's still amusing
just describing your position.
You have never offered any evidence.
You have never asked for any evidence.
Whatever.
m***@.not.
2014-09-25 22:33:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
...
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
"The gods of the theists who bother us here don't exist, even in non-god
form." - Free Lunch
The fact that we don't bother trying to decide of the entire set of all
possible gods do or do not exist does not affect the fact that the gods
preached by the theist fools who waste our time in alt.atheism do not
exist.
Present your evidence, not just the possibility you've put your faith in.
Define your god for me so I can show you that your god does not exist.
To me the minimum would be a being not native to Earth that had deliberate
influence on the way life developed on this planet.
So your god is trivially unimportant.
Not compared to you, or me, or anyone else who has ever lived.
Post by Free Lunch
Fine.
You damn sure can't do anything about it no matter what you say or try to
do.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Until you offer a well-defined god, there is nothing to discuss. Not
only is it too vague to be useful, but some theists will keep redefining
their god to make excuses for why their prior definition made it
impossible for that god to exist.
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
When you find some evidence to support a god, get back to us.
You lie about the evidence you are presented with, yet have no
clue...LOL...what sort of evidence you think there should be. It's still amusing
just describing your position.
You have never offered any evidence.
You have never asked for any evidence.
Whatever.
"Atheists dont demand evidence." - ***@m.nu
Free Lunch
2014-09-25 23:09:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
...
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
"The gods of the theists who bother us here don't exist, even in non-god
form." - Free Lunch
The fact that we don't bother trying to decide of the entire set of all
possible gods do or do not exist does not affect the fact that the gods
preached by the theist fools who waste our time in alt.atheism do not
exist.
Present your evidence, not just the possibility you've put your faith in.
Define your god for me so I can show you that your god does not exist.
To me the minimum would be a being not native to Earth that had deliberate
influence on the way life developed on this planet.
So your god is trivially unimportant.
Not compared to you, or me, or anyone else who has ever lived.
How so? Your god is one of those that is completely unsubstantiated and
meaningless.
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Fine.
You damn sure can't do anything about it no matter what you say or try to
do.
I agree that I cannot turn you into a rational human. That is your
problem.
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Until you offer a well-defined god, there is nothing to discuss. Not
only is it too vague to be useful, but some theists will keep redefining
their god to make excuses for why their prior definition made it
impossible for that god to exist.
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
When you find some evidence to support a god, get back to us.
You lie about the evidence you are presented with, yet have no
clue...LOL...what sort of evidence you think there should be. It's still amusing
just describing your position.
You have never offered any evidence.
You have never asked for any evidence.
Whatever.
m***@.not.
2014-09-29 01:03:38 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 18:09:13 -0500, Free Lunch <***@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
...
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
"The gods of the theists who bother us here don't exist, even in non-god
form." - Free Lunch
The fact that we don't bother trying to decide of the entire set of all
possible gods do or do not exist does not affect the fact that the gods
preached by the theist fools who waste our time in alt.atheism do not
exist.
Present your evidence, not just the possibility you've put your faith in.
Define your god for me so I can show you that your god does not exist.
To me the minimum would be a being not native to Earth that had deliberate
influence on the way life developed on this planet.
So your god is trivially unimportant.
Not compared to you, or me, or anyone else who has ever lived.
How so? Your god is one of those that is completely unsubstantiated and
meaningless.
We were discussing a definition, not the amount of proof of the actual
existence or not of what is being defined.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Fine.
You damn sure can't do anything about it no matter what you say or try to
do.
I agree that I cannot turn you into a rational human. That is your
problem.
I consider the possibility that there is no God associated with Earth, and
the possibility that there is. I've also challenged many of you atheists, and
probably you yourself, to try to explain why I should put my faith in the first
possibility being the correct one. Until one of you people finally manages to
give some respectable reason(s) why I should put my faith in that first
possibility being the correct ONE, it will continue to seem much more rational
to consider more than that one and not put faith in it.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Until you offer a well-defined god, there is nothing to discuss. Not
only is it too vague to be useful, but some theists will keep redefining
their god to make excuses for why their prior definition made it
impossible for that god to exist.
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
When you find some evidence to support a god, get back to us.
You lie about the evidence you are presented with, yet have no
clue...LOL...what sort of evidence you think there should be. It's still amusing
just describing your position.
You have never offered any evidence.
You have never asked for any evidence.
Whatever.
felix_unger
2014-10-05 01:25:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@.not.
..
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
...
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
"The gods of the theists who bother us here don't exist, even in non-god
form." - Free Lunch
The fact that we don't bother trying to decide of the entire set of all
possible gods do or do not exist does not affect the fact that the gods
preached by the theist fools who waste our time in alt.atheism do not
exist.
Present your evidence, not just the possibility you've put your faith in.
Define your god for me so I can show you that your god does not exist.
To me the minimum would be a being not native to Earth that had deliberate
influence on the way life developed on this planet.
So your god is trivially unimportant.
Not compared to you, or me, or anyone else who has ever lived.
How so? Your god is one of those that is completely unsubstantiated and
meaningless.
We were discussing a definition, not the amount of proof of the actual
existence or not of what is being defined.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Fine.
You damn sure can't do anything about it no matter what you say or try to
do.
I agree that I cannot turn you into a rational human. That is your
problem.
I consider the possibility that there is no God associated with Earth, and
the possibility that there is. I've also challenged many of you atheists, and
probably you yourself, to try to explain why I should put my faith in the first
possibility being the correct one. Until one of you people finally manages to
give some respectable reason(s) why I should put my faith in that first
possibility being the correct ONE, it will continue to seem much more rational
to consider more than that one and not put faith in it.
They have no answer for this
--
rgds,

Pete
-------
It's not about Islam!.. Loading Image...
Islam is a religion of peace!.. http://thereligionofpeace.com
http://pamelageller.com/
β€œThe future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam” - Barack Hussein Obama
Free Lunch
2014-10-05 13:14:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by felix_unger
Post by m***@.not.
..
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
...
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
"The gods of the theists who bother us here don't exist, even in non-god
form." - Free Lunch
The fact that we don't bother trying to decide of the entire set of all
possible gods do or do not exist does not affect the fact that the gods
preached by the theist fools who waste our time in alt.atheism do not
exist.
Present your evidence, not just the possibility you've put your faith in.
Define your god for me so I can show you that your god does not exist.
To me the minimum would be a being not native to Earth that had deliberate
influence on the way life developed on this planet.
So your god is trivially unimportant.
Not compared to you, or me, or anyone else who has ever lived.
How so? Your god is one of those that is completely unsubstantiated and
meaningless.
We were discussing a definition, not the amount of proof of the actual
existence or not of what is being defined.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Fine.
You damn sure can't do anything about it no matter what you say or try to
do.
I agree that I cannot turn you into a rational human. That is your
problem.
I consider the possibility that there is no God associated with Earth, and
the possibility that there is. I've also challenged many of you atheists, and
probably you yourself, to try to explain why I should put my faith in the first
possibility being the correct one. Until one of you people finally manages to
give some respectable reason(s) why I should put my faith in that first
possibility being the correct ONE, it will continue to seem much more rational
to consider more than that one and not put faith in it.
They have no answer for this
Mur may or may not have a completely different definition of god from
you, but he likes being coy about it. He doesn't tell you what he
believes, merely that he has fun trying to bait others.
felix_unger
2014-10-05 23:02:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
Post by felix_unger
Post by m***@.not.
..
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
...
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
"The gods of the theists who bother us here don't exist, even in non-god
form." - Free Lunch
The fact that we don't bother trying to decide of the entire set of all
possible gods do or do not exist does not affect the fact that the gods
preached by the theist fools who waste our time in alt.atheism do not
exist.
Present your evidence, not just the possibility you've put your faith in.
Define your god for me so I can show you that your god does not exist.
To me the minimum would be a being not native to Earth that had deliberate
influence on the way life developed on this planet.
So your god is trivially unimportant.
Not compared to you, or me, or anyone else who has ever lived.
How so? Your god is one of those that is completely unsubstantiated and
meaningless.
We were discussing a definition, not the amount of proof of the actual
existence or not of what is being defined.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Fine.
You damn sure can't do anything about it no matter what you say or try to
do.
I agree that I cannot turn you into a rational human. That is your
problem.
I consider the possibility that there is no God associated with Earth, and
the possibility that there is. I've also challenged many of you atheists, and
probably you yourself, to try to explain why I should put my faith in the first
possibility being the correct one. Until one of you people finally manages to
give some respectable reason(s) why I should put my faith in that first
possibility being the correct ONE, it will continue to seem much more rational
to consider more than that one and not put faith in it.
They have no answer for this
Mur may or may not have a completely different definition of god from
you, but he likes being coy about it. He doesn't tell you what he
believes, merely that he has fun trying to bait others.
whatever. the point is that it makes more sense to allow all
possibilities rather than be committed to just one
--
rgds,

Pete
-------
It's not about Islam!.. http://ausnet.info/pics/islam.png
Islam is a religion of peace!.. http://thereligionofpeace.com
http://pamelageller.com/
β€œThe future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam” - Barack Hussein Obama
Free Lunch
2014-10-06 23:11:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by felix_unger
Post by Free Lunch
Post by felix_unger
Post by m***@.not.
..
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
...
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
"The gods of the theists who bother us here don't exist, even in non-god
form." - Free Lunch
The fact that we don't bother trying to decide of the entire set of all
possible gods do or do not exist does not affect the fact that the gods
preached by the theist fools who waste our time in alt.atheism do not
exist.
Present your evidence, not just the possibility you've put your faith in.
Define your god for me so I can show you that your god does not exist.
To me the minimum would be a being not native to Earth that had deliberate
influence on the way life developed on this planet.
So your god is trivially unimportant.
Not compared to you, or me, or anyone else who has ever lived.
How so? Your god is one of those that is completely unsubstantiated and
meaningless.
We were discussing a definition, not the amount of proof of the actual
existence or not of what is being defined.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Fine.
You damn sure can't do anything about it no matter what you say or try to
do.
I agree that I cannot turn you into a rational human. That is your
problem.
I consider the possibility that there is no God associated with Earth, and
the possibility that there is. I've also challenged many of you atheists, and
probably you yourself, to try to explain why I should put my faith in the first
possibility being the correct one. Until one of you people finally manages to
give some respectable reason(s) why I should put my faith in that first
possibility being the correct ONE, it will continue to seem much more rational
to consider more than that one and not put faith in it.
They have no answer for this
Mur may or may not have a completely different definition of god from
you, but he likes being coy about it. He doesn't tell you what he
believes, merely that he has fun trying to bait others.
whatever. the point is that it makes more sense to allow all
possibilities rather than be committed to just one
Why are you willing to believe the most absurd, evidence-free claims?
felix_unger
2014-10-07 04:00:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
Post by felix_unger
Post by Free Lunch
Post by felix_unger
Post by m***@.not.
..
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
...
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
"The gods of the theists who bother us here don't exist, even in non-god
form." - Free Lunch
The fact that we don't bother trying to decide of the entire set of all
possible gods do or do not exist does not affect the fact that the gods
preached by the theist fools who waste our time in alt.atheism do not
exist.
Present your evidence, not just the possibility you've put your faith in.
Define your god for me so I can show you that your god does not exist.
To me the minimum would be a being not native to Earth that had deliberate
influence on the way life developed on this planet.
So your god is trivially unimportant.
Not compared to you, or me, or anyone else who has ever lived.
How so? Your god is one of those that is completely unsubstantiated and
meaningless.
We were discussing a definition, not the amount of proof of the actual
existence or not of what is being defined.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Fine.
You damn sure can't do anything about it no matter what you say or try to
do.
I agree that I cannot turn you into a rational human. That is your
problem.
I consider the possibility that there is no God associated with Earth, and
the possibility that there is. I've also challenged many of you atheists, and
probably you yourself, to try to explain why I should put my faith in the first
possibility being the correct one. Until one of you people finally manages to
give some respectable reason(s) why I should put my faith in that first
possibility being the correct ONE, it will continue to seem much more rational
to consider more than that one and not put faith in it.
They have no answer for this
Mur may or may not have a completely different definition of god from
you, but he likes being coy about it. He doesn't tell you what he
believes, merely that he has fun trying to bait others.
whatever. the point is that it makes more sense to allow all
possibilities rather than be committed to just one
Why are you willing to believe the most absurd, evidence-free claims?
lol, that's funny coming from an atheist who has no evidence for his
no-god position.
--
rgds,

Pete
-------
It's not about Islam!.. http://ausnet.info/pics/islam.png
Islam is a religion of peace!.. http://thereligionofpeace.com
http://pamelageller.com/
β€œThe future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam” - Barack Hussein Obama
Free Lunch
2014-10-08 00:07:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by felix_unger
Post by Free Lunch
Post by felix_unger
Post by Free Lunch
Post by felix_unger
Post by m***@.not.
..
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
...
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
"The gods of the theists who bother us here don't exist, even in non-god
form." - Free Lunch
The fact that we don't bother trying to decide of the entire set of all
possible gods do or do not exist does not affect the fact that the gods
preached by the theist fools who waste our time in alt.atheism do not
exist.
Present your evidence, not just the possibility you've put your faith in.
Define your god for me so I can show you that your god does not exist.
To me the minimum would be a being not native to Earth that had deliberate
influence on the way life developed on this planet.
So your god is trivially unimportant.
Not compared to you, or me, or anyone else who has ever lived.
How so? Your god is one of those that is completely unsubstantiated and
meaningless.
We were discussing a definition, not the amount of proof of the actual
existence or not of what is being defined.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Fine.
You damn sure can't do anything about it no matter what you say or try to
do.
I agree that I cannot turn you into a rational human. That is your
problem.
I consider the possibility that there is no God associated with Earth, and
the possibility that there is. I've also challenged many of you atheists, and
probably you yourself, to try to explain why I should put my faith in the first
possibility being the correct one. Until one of you people finally manages to
give some respectable reason(s) why I should put my faith in that first
possibility being the correct ONE, it will continue to seem much more rational
to consider more than that one and not put faith in it.
They have no answer for this
Mur may or may not have a completely different definition of god from
you, but he likes being coy about it. He doesn't tell you what he
believes, merely that he has fun trying to bait others.
whatever. the point is that it makes more sense to allow all
possibilities rather than be committed to just one
Why are you willing to believe the most absurd, evidence-free claims?
lol, that's funny coming from an atheist who has no evidence for his
no-god position.
Since there is no evidence for any gods, it would be silly to claim that
Wotan or whatever god you worship exists.
m***@.not.
2014-10-09 00:26:06 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 07 Oct 2014 19:07:53 -0500, Free Lunch <***@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by felix_unger
Post by Free Lunch
Post by felix_unger
Post by Free Lunch
Post by felix_unger
Post by m***@.not.
..
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
...
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
"The gods of the theists who bother us here don't exist, even in non-god
form." - Free Lunch
The fact that we don't bother trying to decide of the entire set of all
possible gods do or do not exist does not affect the fact that the gods
preached by the theist fools who waste our time in alt.atheism do not
exist.
Present your evidence, not just the possibility you've put your faith in.
Define your god for me so I can show you that your god does not exist.
To me the minimum would be a being not native to Earth that had deliberate
influence on the way life developed on this planet.
So your god is trivially unimportant.
Not compared to you, or me, or anyone else who has ever lived.
How so? Your god is one of those that is completely unsubstantiated and
meaningless.
We were discussing a definition, not the amount of proof of the actual
existence or not of what is being defined.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Fine.
You damn sure can't do anything about it no matter what you say or try to
do.
I agree that I cannot turn you into a rational human. That is your
problem.
I consider the possibility that there is no God associated with Earth, and
the possibility that there is. I've also challenged many of you atheists, and
probably you yourself, to try to explain why I should put my faith in the first
possibility being the correct one. Until one of you people finally manages to
give some respectable reason(s) why I should put my faith in that first
possibility being the correct ONE, it will continue to seem much more rational
to consider more than that one and not put faith in it.
They have no answer for this
Mur may or may not have a completely different definition of god from
you, but he likes being coy about it. He doesn't tell you what he
believes, merely that he has fun trying to bait others.
whatever. the point is that it makes more sense to allow all
possibilities rather than be committed to just one
Why are you willing to believe the most absurd, evidence-free claims?
lol, that's funny coming from an atheist who has no evidence for his
no-god position.
Since there is no evidence for any gods, it would be silly to claim that
Wotan or whatever god you worship exists.
Since there's no evidence that God doesn't exist, it would be as or more
silly to claim no gods exist. Since you don't have the slightest idea what sort
of evidence you think should be where or why you think it should be there if God
does exist, it would be retarded to think you have any idea what you think
you're trying to talk about since all evidence says you have none.
m***@.not.
2014-10-09 00:26:01 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 07 Oct 2014 15:00:58 +1100, felix_unger <***@nothere.biz> wrote:
.
Post by felix_unger
Post by Free Lunch
Post by felix_unger
Post by Free Lunch
Post by felix_unger
Post by m***@.not.
..
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
...
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
"The gods of the theists who bother us here don't exist, even in non-god
form." - Free Lunch
The fact that we don't bother trying to decide of the entire set of all
possible gods do or do not exist does not affect the fact that the gods
preached by the theist fools who waste our time in alt.atheism do not
exist.
Present your evidence, not just the possibility you've put your faith in.
Define your god for me so I can show you that your god does not exist.
To me the minimum would be a being not native to Earth that had deliberate
influence on the way life developed on this planet.
So your god is trivially unimportant.
Not compared to you, or me, or anyone else who has ever lived.
How so? Your god is one of those that is completely unsubstantiated and
meaningless.
We were discussing a definition, not the amount of proof of the actual
existence or not of what is being defined.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Fine.
You damn sure can't do anything about it no matter what you say or try to
do.
I agree that I cannot turn you into a rational human. That is your
problem.
I consider the possibility that there is no God associated with Earth, and
the possibility that there is. I've also challenged many of you atheists, and
probably you yourself, to try to explain why I should put my faith in the first
possibility being the correct one. Until one of you people finally manages to
give some respectable reason(s) why I should put my faith in that first
possibility being the correct ONE, it will continue to seem much more rational
to consider more than that one and not put faith in it.
They have no answer for this
Mur may or may not have a completely different definition of god from
you, but he likes being coy about it. He doesn't tell you what he
believes, merely that he has fun trying to bait others.
whatever. the point is that it makes more sense to allow all
possibilities rather than be committed to just one
Why are you willing to believe the most absurd, evidence-free claims?
lol, that's funny coming from an atheist who has no evidence for his
no-god position.
And who can't explain what sort of evidence he thinks there should be if God
does exist, or where it should be, or why it should be there...LOL...it's still
amusing to describe the situation these people are in.
felix_unger
2014-10-06 05:02:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
Post by felix_unger
Post by m***@.not.
..
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
...
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
"The gods of the theists who bother us here don't exist, even in non-god
form." - Free Lunch
The fact that we don't bother trying to decide of the entire set of all
possible gods do or do not exist does not affect the fact that the gods
preached by the theist fools who waste our time in alt.atheism do not
exist.
Present your evidence, not just the possibility you've put your faith in.
Define your god for me so I can show you that your god does not exist.
To me the minimum would be a being not native to Earth that had deliberate
influence on the way life developed on this planet.
So your god is trivially unimportant.
Not compared to you, or me, or anyone else who has ever lived.
How so? Your god is one of those that is completely unsubstantiated and
meaningless.
We were discussing a definition, not the amount of proof of the actual
existence or not of what is being defined.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Fine.
You damn sure can't do anything about it no matter what you say or try to
do.
I agree that I cannot turn you into a rational human. That is your
problem.
I consider the possibility that there is no God associated with Earth, and
the possibility that there is. I've also challenged many of you atheists, and
probably you yourself, to try to explain why I should put my faith in the first
possibility being the correct one. Until one of you people finally manages to
give some respectable reason(s) why I should put my faith in that first
possibility being the correct ONE, it will continue to seem much more rational
to consider more than that one and not put faith in it.
They have no answer for this
Mur may or may not have a completely different definition of god from
you, but he likes being coy about it. He doesn't tell you what he
believes,
he freely admits to being a weak agnostic
Post by Free Lunch
merely that he has fun trying to bait others.
--
rgds,

Pete
-------
Question - How do you remove liberty from free people?
Answer - Slowly
Free Lunch
2014-10-06 23:13:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by felix_unger
Post by Free Lunch
Post by felix_unger
Post by m***@.not.
..
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
...
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
"The gods of the theists who bother us here don't exist, even in non-god
form." - Free Lunch
The fact that we don't bother trying to decide of the entire set of all
possible gods do or do not exist does not affect the fact that the gods
preached by the theist fools who waste our time in alt.atheism do not
exist.
Present your evidence, not just the possibility you've put your faith in.
Define your god for me so I can show you that your god does not exist.
To me the minimum would be a being not native to Earth that had deliberate
influence on the way life developed on this planet.
So your god is trivially unimportant.
Not compared to you, or me, or anyone else who has ever lived.
How so? Your god is one of those that is completely unsubstantiated and
meaningless.
We were discussing a definition, not the amount of proof of the actual
existence or not of what is being defined.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Fine.
You damn sure can't do anything about it no matter what you say or try to
do.
I agree that I cannot turn you into a rational human. That is your
problem.
I consider the possibility that there is no God associated with Earth, and
the possibility that there is. I've also challenged many of you atheists, and
probably you yourself, to try to explain why I should put my faith in the first
possibility being the correct one. Until one of you people finally manages to
give some respectable reason(s) why I should put my faith in that first
possibility being the correct ONE, it will continue to seem much more rational
to consider more than that one and not put faith in it.
They have no answer for this
Mur may or may not have a completely different definition of god from
you, but he likes being coy about it. He doesn't tell you what he
believes,
he freely admits to being a weak agnostic
Agnostic is not a place to hide between theism and atheism. It is a
statement that one can never find evidence for gods whether one believes
in them or not. Agnostics are either theist or atheist. Mur appears to
be theist.
Post by felix_unger
Post by Free Lunch
merely that he has fun trying to bait others.
m***@.not.
2014-10-09 00:25:57 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 05 Oct 2014 08:14:43 -0500, Free Lunch <***@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by felix_unger
Post by m***@.not.
..
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
...
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
"The gods of the theists who bother us here don't exist, even in non-god
form." - Free Lunch
The fact that we don't bother trying to decide of the entire set of all
possible gods do or do not exist does not affect the fact that the gods
preached by the theist fools who waste our time in alt.atheism do not
exist.
Present your evidence, not just the possibility you've put your faith in.
Define your god for me so I can show you that your god does not exist.
To me the minimum would be a being not native to Earth that had deliberate
influence on the way life developed on this planet.
So your god is trivially unimportant.
Not compared to you, or me, or anyone else who has ever lived.
How so? Your god is one of those that is completely unsubstantiated and
meaningless.
We were discussing a definition, not the amount of proof of the actual
existence or not of what is being defined.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Fine.
You damn sure can't do anything about it no matter what you say or try to
do.
I agree that I cannot turn you into a rational human. That is your
problem.
I consider the possibility that there is no God associated with Earth, and
the possibility that there is. I've also challenged many of you atheists, and
probably you yourself, to try to explain why I should put my faith in the first
possibility being the correct one. Until one of you people finally manages to
give some respectable reason(s) why I should put my faith in that first
possibility being the correct ONE, it will continue to seem much more rational
to consider more than that one and not put faith in it.
They have no answer for this
Mur may or may not have a completely different definition of god from
you, but he likes being coy about it. He doesn't tell you what he
believes,
As felix pointed out for you I am a weak agnostic. Since you can't
appreciate what that means, and even though you still won't be able to after I
tell you, I'll tell you anyway. It means I don't have a true belief about God
which many of you atheists also claim. The difference is that I really don't, so
I consider both possibilities. The possibility that God does exist involves MUCH
more thought and there's much more to try to understand to whatever extent. A
strong agnostic feels that even if God does exist, no one can know whether he
does or not. A weak agnostic believes it's possibe for some people to know it if
God does exist. No one can know it if God does not exist, though some posting in
these ngs claim to be stupid enough to believe they do know somehow. But one of
their problems with it is that they can't explain any way in which they could
possibly have found out.

I also believe God would have to be an alien since he couldn't be native to
Earth, and that he would have to be technologically advanced far beyond what we
humans are. Also that if he does exist he knows when people are praying to or
addressing him if he cares at all, regardless of how they refer to him. Also
that if he exists, you people can't make him cease to exist regardless of how
much and how hard you deny his existence. No matter how much faith you put in
that being the correct possibility, you can't make him cease to exist if he
does.
Post by Free Lunch
merely that he has fun trying to bait others.
I point out significant things people don't want to take into consideration
and encourage them to move beyond the position they're in. I also challenge
people to try to explain absurd seeming claims and demands in an effort to find
out why they may not really be absurd, or help them understand the absurdity
themselves when they find that they can't explain. It never works out either of
those ways though, but instead the challenges always defeat those who are
presented with them usually to the point that they can't even attempt to address
them. That applies to situations where the response is to hurl childlike
personal insults, and/or change the subject to something else, as well as to
when no reply is made at all.
m***@.not.
2014-10-05 23:00:14 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 05 Oct 2014 12:25:36 +1100, felix_unger <***@nothere.biz> wrote:
.
Post by felix_unger
Post by m***@.not.
..
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
...
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
"The gods of the theists who bother us here don't exist, even in non-god
form." - Free Lunch
The fact that we don't bother trying to decide of the entire set of all
possible gods do or do not exist does not affect the fact that the gods
preached by the theist fools who waste our time in alt.atheism do not
exist.
Present your evidence, not just the possibility you've put your faith in.
Define your god for me so I can show you that your god does not exist.
To me the minimum would be a being not native to Earth that had deliberate
influence on the way life developed on this planet.
So your god is trivially unimportant.
Not compared to you, or me, or anyone else who has ever lived.
How so? Your god is one of those that is completely unsubstantiated and
meaningless.
We were discussing a definition, not the amount of proof of the actual
existence or not of what is being defined.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Fine.
You damn sure can't do anything about it no matter what you say or try to
do.
I agree that I cannot turn you into a rational human. That is your
problem.
I consider the possibility that there is no God associated with Earth, and
the possibility that there is. I've also challenged many of you atheists, and
probably you yourself, to try to explain why I should put my faith in the first
possibility being the correct one. Until one of you people finally manages to
give some respectable reason(s) why I should put my faith in that first
possibility being the correct ONE, it will continue to seem much more rational
to consider more than that one and not put faith in it.
They have no answer for this
They don't seem to have anything other than a few personal insults to throw
around and the blatant lie that there's no evidence. Then when challenged to try
explaining what evidence they think there should be if God exists and things
related to their demand for evidence they haven't got the slightest idea. It
seems the very Bible they claim is not evidence mentioned their position over a
thousand years ago, and it's still made obvious by their own mental limitations
yet today. Atheists themselves are evidence of God's existence by being evidence
of Satan's influence on their pitiful little minds:
_________________________________________________________
Psalm 53
1 The fool says in his heart,
"There is no God."
They are corrupt, and their ways are vile;
there is no one who does good.

Mathew 7
6 "Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do,
they may trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces."

Mathew 13
13 "This is why I speak to them in parables:

"Though seeing, they do not see;
though hearing, they do not hear or understand.
14 In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah:

"You will be ever hearing but never understanding;
you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.
15 For this peopleΒ’s heart has become calloused;
they hardly hear with their ears,
and they have closed their eyes.
Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
hear with their ears,
understand with their hearts
and turn, and I would heal them.Β’"

Mark 6
11 "And if any place will not welcome you or listen to you, leave that place and
shake the dust off your feet as a testimony against them."

John 8
43 "Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I
say.
44 You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your fatherΒ’s
desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for
there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is
a liar and the father of lies.

2 Corinthians 2
11 in order that Satan might not outwit us. For we are not unaware of his
schemes.

2 Corinthians 4
4 The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot
see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image
of God.

2 Corinthians 6
14 Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and
wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness?

Ephesians 4
18 They are darkened in their understanding and separated from the life of God
because of the ignorance that is in them due to the hardening of their hearts.

1 Timothy 4
1 The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and
follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons.
2 Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been
seared as with a hot iron.

2 Timothy 2
24 And the LordΒ’s servant must not be quarrelsome but must be kind to everyone,
able to teach, not resentful.
25 Opponents must be gently instructed, in the hope that God will grant them
repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth,
26 and that they will come to their senses and escape from the trap of the
devil, who has taken them captive to do his will.

James 1
13 When tempted, no one should say, "God is tempting me." For God cannot be
tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone

1 Peter 5
8 Be alert and of sober mind. Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring
lion looking for someone to devour.

1 John 2
22 Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person
is the antichrist--denying the Father and the Son.
Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―Β―
felix_unger
2014-09-21 03:17:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
....
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
"The gods of the theists who bother us here don't exist, even in non-god
form." - Free Lunch
The fact that we don't bother trying to decide of the entire set of all
possible gods do or do not exist does not affect the fact that the gods
preached by the theist fools who waste our time in alt.atheism do not
exist.
Present your evidence, not just the possibility you've put your faith in.
Define your god for me so I can show you that your god does not exist.
which dictionary would you like to use? pick one, and look up the word
'God'. even atheists should be able to accomplish that!
Post by Free Lunch
Until you offer a well-defined god, there is nothing to discuss. Not
only is it too vague to be useful, but some theists will keep redefining
their god to make excuses for why their prior definition made it
impossible for that god to exist.
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
When you find some evidence to support a god, get back to us.
You lie about the evidence you are presented with, yet have no
clue...LOL...what sort of evidence you think there should be. It's still amusing
just describing your position.
You have never offered any evidence. You know that. I have never lied
about any evidence that has been presented because we all know that
there has never been any evidence presented to show that any god exists.
you keep saying that any evidence for God is not evidence, so there's no
point in even trying to discuss with you
Post by Free Lunch
I expect you to make more excuses and offer absolutely no evidence
because that has been your game plan up to this point.
....
--
rgds,

Pete
-------
election results explained: Loading Image...
β€œPeople sleep peacefully in their beds only because rough
men stand ready to do violence on their behalf”
Free Lunch
2014-09-21 14:08:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by felix_unger
Post by Free Lunch
....
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
"The gods of the theists who bother us here don't exist, even in non-god
form." - Free Lunch
The fact that we don't bother trying to decide of the entire set of all
possible gods do or do not exist does not affect the fact that the gods
preached by the theist fools who waste our time in alt.atheism do not
exist.
Present your evidence, not just the possibility you've put your faith in.
Define your god for me so I can show you that your god does not exist.
which dictionary would you like to use? pick one, and look up the word
'God'. even atheists should be able to accomplish that!
There have been thousands of gods worshipped. Sure you capitalized it,
which implies that you are talking about the God of Abraham? Do you
refer to the god that was the jealous god that hated it when other gods
were worshipped? Do you refer to the only god that Islam and Judaism
worship today? Do you refer to the triune god of most of Christianity?
Do you refer to the more interesting gods invented by LDS and other
newer denominations?

Tell me what you think your god is and does. Define the attributes. Is
your god all knowing, all kind, all powerful? What is it?
Post by felix_unger
Post by Free Lunch
Until you offer a well-defined god, there is nothing to discuss. Not
only is it too vague to be useful, but some theists will keep redefining
their god to make excuses for why their prior definition made it
impossible for that god to exist.
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
When you find some evidence to support a god, get back to us.
You lie about the evidence you are presented with, yet have no
clue...LOL...what sort of evidence you think there should be. It's still amusing
just describing your position.
You have never offered any evidence. You know that. I have never lied
about any evidence that has been presented because we all know that
there has never been any evidence presented to show that any god exists.
you keep saying that any evidence for God is not evidence, so there's no
point in even trying to discuss with you
You have no evidence for your god. Things that are not evidence do not
become evidence merely because you believe they should be evidence.
Post by felix_unger
Post by Free Lunch
I expect you to make more excuses and offer absolutely no evidence
because that has been your game plan up to this point.
....
felix_unger
2014-09-21 22:20:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
Post by felix_unger
Post by Free Lunch
....
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
"The gods of the theists who bother us here don't exist, even in non-god
form." - Free Lunch
The fact that we don't bother trying to decide of the entire set of all
possible gods do or do not exist does not affect the fact that the gods
preached by the theist fools who waste our time in alt.atheism do not
exist.
Present your evidence, not just the possibility you've put your faith in.
Define your god for me so I can show you that your god does not exist.
which dictionary would you like to use? pick one, and look up the word
'God'. even atheists should be able to accomplish that!
There have been thousands of gods worshipped. Sure you capitalized it,
which implies that you are talking about the God of Abraham? Do you
refer to the god that was the jealous god that hated it when other gods
were worshipped? Do you refer to the only god that Islam and Judaism
worship today? Do you refer to the triune god of most of Christianity?
Do you refer to the more interesting gods invented by LDS and other
newer denominations?
as has been pointed out to you in the past my mur, ppl can believe all
sorts of things about God, but that will not alter the fact of whether
God exists or not.
Post by Free Lunch
Tell me what you think your god is and does. Define the attributes. Is
your god all knowing, all kind, all powerful? What is it?
that's another matter, isn't it
Post by Free Lunch
Post by felix_unger
Post by Free Lunch
Until you offer a well-defined god, there is nothing to discuss. Not
only is it too vague to be useful, but some theists will keep redefining
their god to make excuses for why their prior definition made it
impossible for that god to exist.
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
When you find some evidence to support a god, get back to us.
You lie about the evidence you are presented with, yet have no
clue...LOL...what sort of evidence you think there should be. It's still amusing
just describing your position.
You have never offered any evidence. You know that. I have never lied
about any evidence that has been presented because we all know that
there has never been any evidence presented to show that any god exists.
you keep saying that any evidence for God is not evidence, so there's no
point in even trying to discuss with you
You have no evidence for your god. Things that are not evidence do not
become evidence merely because you believe they should be evidence.
things that are evidence do not cease to become evidence merely because
you believe they are not
--
rgds,

Pete
-------
election results explained: http://ausnet.info/pics/labor_wins2.jpg
β€œPeople sleep peacefully in their beds only because rough
men stand ready to do violence on their behalf”
Uergil
2014-09-04 00:27:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist, but are not certain
because they cannot absolutely prove it.

Those who claim otherwise have no idea what atheists are like!
--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less
remote from the- truth who believes nothing than
he who believes what is wrong.
Thomas Jefferson
Free Lunch
2014-09-05 14:16:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist, but are not certain
because they cannot absolutely prove it.
Those who claim otherwise have no idea what atheists are like!
Atheists do not believe in any gods. Suspect is a meaningless word in
this context. Theists know they cannot support their belief in their
gods with evidence.
m***@.not.
2014-09-05 18:44:14 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 05 Sep 2014 09:16:47 -0500, Free Lunch <***@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist, but are not certain
because they cannot absolutely prove it.
Those who claim otherwise have no idea what atheists are like!
Atheists do not believe in any gods. Suspect is a meaningless word in
this context. Theists know they cannot support their belief in their
gods with evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Free Lunch
2014-09-05 19:35:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist, but are not certain
because they cannot absolutely prove it.
Those who claim otherwise have no idea what atheists are like!
Atheists do not believe in any gods. Suspect is a meaningless word in
this context. Theists know they cannot support their belief in their
gods with evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Until you define your god, you cannot possibly determine what evidence
you should be able to provide. If you do not define your god, you don't
believe in any gods anyway.
m***@.not.
2014-09-10 18:47:21 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 05 Sep 2014 14:35:42 -0500, Free Lunch <***@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist, but are not certain
because they cannot absolutely prove it.
Those who claim otherwise have no idea what atheists are like!
Atheists do not believe in any gods. Suspect is a meaningless word in
this context. Theists know they cannot support their belief in their
gods with evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Until you define your god, you cannot possibly determine what evidence
you should be able to provide.
Since you feel there should be evidence for it you define it and then try to
explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists. Why are such basic things so impossible for
you people?
Free Lunch
2014-09-10 22:55:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist, but are not certain
because they cannot absolutely prove it.
Those who claim otherwise have no idea what atheists are like!
Atheists do not believe in any gods. Suspect is a meaningless word in
this context. Theists know they cannot support their belief in their
gods with evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Until you define your god, you cannot possibly determine what evidence
you should be able to provide.
Since you feel there should be evidence for it you define it and then try to
explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists. Why are such basic things so impossible for
you people?
I'm not the one who invented any gods. I don't have any responsibility
for the problems that theists have defending their religious dogma. When
you find some evidence to support a god, let us know.
m***@.not.
2014-09-13 15:57:10 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 10 Sep 2014 17:55:17 -0500, Free Lunch <***@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist, but are not certain
because they cannot absolutely prove it.
Those who claim otherwise have no idea what atheists are like!
Atheists do not believe in any gods. Suspect is a meaningless word in
this context. Theists know they cannot support their belief in their
gods with evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Until you define your god, you cannot possibly determine what evidence
you should be able to provide.
Since you feel there should be evidence for it you define it and then try to
explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists. Why are such basic things so impossible for
you people?
I'm not the one who invented any gods. I don't have any responsibility
for the problems that theists have defending their religious dogma. When
you find some evidence to support a god, let us know.
People have provided you with evidence and you lie about that because you
don't happen to like it. Then when challenged on what sort of evidence you think
there should be you have no idea at all. LOL...as is often the case, you
people's position is hilarious!
Free Lunch
2014-09-13 16:10:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist, but are not certain
because they cannot absolutely prove it.
Those who claim otherwise have no idea what atheists are like!
Atheists do not believe in any gods. Suspect is a meaningless word in
this context. Theists know they cannot support their belief in their
gods with evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Until you define your god, you cannot possibly determine what evidence
you should be able to provide.
Since you feel there should be evidence for it you define it and then try to
explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists. Why are such basic things so impossible for
you people?
I'm not the one who invented any gods. I don't have any responsibility
for the problems that theists have defending their religious dogma. When
you find some evidence to support a god, let us know.
People have provided you with evidence
Show me. Direct me to any post that actually shows that evidence has
been provided. You cannot because you know that no such evidence was
provided.
Post by m***@.not.
and you lie about that because you don't happen to like it.
We both know that no evidence has ever been offered that any gods exist.
I have no need to lie about that. You try to find excuses because you
know that you cannot provide any evidence or direct me to any evidence
that others have provided.
Post by m***@.not.
Then when challenged on what sort of evidence you think
there should be you have no idea at all. LOL...as is often the case, you
people's position is hilarious!
You know what evidence is.

You know that you have no evidence that your gods exist.

You need to stop making excuses to us.
m***@.not.
2014-09-18 21:22:45 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 13 Sep 2014 11:10:35 -0500, Free Lunch <***@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist, but are not certain
because they cannot absolutely prove it.
Those who claim otherwise have no idea what atheists are like!
Atheists do not believe in any gods. Suspect is a meaningless word in
this context. Theists know they cannot support their belief in their
gods with evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Until you define your god, you cannot possibly determine what evidence
you should be able to provide.
Since you feel there should be evidence for it you define it and then try to
explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists. Why are such basic things so impossible for
you people?
I'm not the one who invented any gods. I don't have any responsibility
for the problems that theists have defending their religious dogma. When
you find some evidence to support a god, let us know.
People have provided you with evidence
Show me. Direct me to any post that actually shows that evidence has
been provided. You cannot because you know that no such evidence was
provided.
Post by m***@.not.
and you lie about that because you don't happen to like it.
We both know that no evidence has ever been offered that any gods exist.
I have no need to lie about that. You try to find excuses because you
know that you cannot provide any evidence or direct me to any evidence
that others have provided.
Post by m***@.not.
Then when challenged on what sort of evidence you think
there should be you have no idea at all. LOL...as is often the case, you
people's position is hilarious!
You know what evidence is.
When I first began challenging you people I thought some of you might
actually have some clue what you thought you were trying to talk about, and
would try to explain what you think it is. But by now we've seen that none of
you have any idea what you think you're trying to talk about when you demand
evidence. You don't have any idea WHAT sort of evidence you think there should
be, WHERE you think it should be, or WHY you think it should be to God's benefit
to provide it if he exists. You also can't appreciate why God would not provide
proof of his existence. You're not capable of actually thinking about this
topic.
Free Lunch
2014-09-18 22:26:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist, but are not certain
because they cannot absolutely prove it.
Those who claim otherwise have no idea what atheists are like!
Atheists do not believe in any gods. Suspect is a meaningless word in
this context. Theists know they cannot support their belief in their
gods with evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Until you define your god, you cannot possibly determine what evidence
you should be able to provide.
Since you feel there should be evidence for it you define it and then try to
explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists. Why are such basic things so impossible for
you people?
I'm not the one who invented any gods. I don't have any responsibility
for the problems that theists have defending their religious dogma. When
you find some evidence to support a god, let us know.
People have provided you with evidence
Show me. Direct me to any post that actually shows that evidence has
been provided. You cannot because you know that no such evidence was
provided.
Post by m***@.not.
and you lie about that because you don't happen to like it.
We both know that no evidence has ever been offered that any gods exist.
I have no need to lie about that. You try to find excuses because you
know that you cannot provide any evidence or direct me to any evidence
that others have provided.
Post by m***@.not.
Then when challenged on what sort of evidence you think
there should be you have no idea at all. LOL...as is often the case, you
people's position is hilarious!
You know what evidence is.
When I first began challenging you people I thought some of you might
actually have some clue what you thought you were trying to talk about, and
would try to explain what you think it is. But by now we've seen that none of
you have any idea what you think you're trying to talk about when you demand
evidence. You don't have any idea WHAT sort of evidence you think there should
be, WHERE you think it should be, or WHY you think it should be to God's benefit
to provide it if he exists. You also can't appreciate why God would not provide
proof of his existence. You're not capable of actually thinking about this
topic.
You really have no idea what you are talking about and clearly don't
care how ignorant or deluded you are. You know that your silly god is a
worthless idea.
m***@.not.
2014-09-25 22:34:28 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 18 Sep 2014 17:26:48 -0500, Free Lunch <***@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist, but are not certain
because they cannot absolutely prove it.
Those who claim otherwise have no idea what atheists are like!
Atheists do not believe in any gods. Suspect is a meaningless word in
this context. Theists know they cannot support their belief in their
gods with evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Until you define your god, you cannot possibly determine what evidence
you should be able to provide.
Since you feel there should be evidence for it you define it and then try to
explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists. Why are such basic things so impossible for
you people?
I'm not the one who invented any gods. I don't have any responsibility
for the problems that theists have defending their religious dogma. When
you find some evidence to support a god, let us know.
People have provided you with evidence
Show me. Direct me to any post that actually shows that evidence has
been provided. You cannot because you know that no such evidence was
provided.
Post by m***@.not.
and you lie about that because you don't happen to like it.
We both know that no evidence has ever been offered that any gods exist.
I have no need to lie about that. You try to find excuses because you
know that you cannot provide any evidence or direct me to any evidence
that others have provided.
Post by m***@.not.
Then when challenged on what sort of evidence you think
there should be you have no idea at all. LOL...as is often the case, you
people's position is hilarious!
You know what evidence is.
When I first began challenging you people I thought some of you might
actually have some clue what you thought you were trying to talk about, and
would try to explain what you think it is. But by now we've seen that none of
you have any idea what you think you're trying to talk about when you demand
evidence. You don't have any idea WHAT sort of evidence you think there should
be, WHERE you think it should be, or WHY you think it should be to God's benefit
to provide it if he exists. You also can't appreciate why God would not provide
proof of his existence. You're not capable of actually thinking about this
topic.
You really have no idea what you are talking about and clearly don't
care how ignorant or deluded you are.
We know the things I pointed out are true and you can't even attempt to
pretend that they're not.
Free Lunch
2014-09-25 23:09:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist, but are not certain
because they cannot absolutely prove it.
Those who claim otherwise have no idea what atheists are like!
Atheists do not believe in any gods. Suspect is a meaningless word in
this context. Theists know they cannot support their belief in their
gods with evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Until you define your god, you cannot possibly determine what evidence
you should be able to provide.
Since you feel there should be evidence for it you define it and then try to
explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists. Why are such basic things so impossible for
you people?
I'm not the one who invented any gods. I don't have any responsibility
for the problems that theists have defending their religious dogma. When
you find some evidence to support a god, let us know.
People have provided you with evidence
Show me. Direct me to any post that actually shows that evidence has
been provided. You cannot because you know that no such evidence was
provided.
Post by m***@.not.
and you lie about that because you don't happen to like it.
We both know that no evidence has ever been offered that any gods exist.
I have no need to lie about that. You try to find excuses because you
know that you cannot provide any evidence or direct me to any evidence
that others have provided.
Post by m***@.not.
Then when challenged on what sort of evidence you think
there should be you have no idea at all. LOL...as is often the case, you
people's position is hilarious!
You know what evidence is.
When I first began challenging you people I thought some of you might
actually have some clue what you thought you were trying to talk about, and
would try to explain what you think it is. But by now we've seen that none of
you have any idea what you think you're trying to talk about when you demand
evidence. You don't have any idea WHAT sort of evidence you think there should
be, WHERE you think it should be, or WHY you think it should be to God's benefit
to provide it if he exists. You also can't appreciate why God would not provide
proof of his existence. You're not capable of actually thinking about this
topic.
You really have no idea what you are talking about and clearly don't
care how ignorant or deluded you are.
We know the things I pointed out are true and you can't even attempt to
pretend that they're not.
No, your claims are not true. How silly do you think we are?
m***@.not.
2014-09-29 01:05:34 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 18:09:43 -0500, Free Lunch <***@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist, but are not certain
because they cannot absolutely prove it.
Those who claim otherwise have no idea what atheists are like!
Atheists do not believe in any gods. Suspect is a meaningless word in
this context. Theists know they cannot support their belief in their
gods with evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Until you define your god, you cannot possibly determine what evidence
you should be able to provide.
Since you feel there should be evidence for it you define it and then try to
explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists. Why are such basic things so impossible for
you people?
I'm not the one who invented any gods. I don't have any responsibility
for the problems that theists have defending their religious dogma. When
you find some evidence to support a god, let us know.
People have provided you with evidence
Show me. Direct me to any post that actually shows that evidence has
been provided. You cannot because you know that no such evidence was
provided.
Post by m***@.not.
and you lie about that because you don't happen to like it.
We both know that no evidence has ever been offered that any gods exist.
I have no need to lie about that. You try to find excuses because you
know that you cannot provide any evidence or direct me to any evidence
that others have provided.
Post by m***@.not.
Then when challenged on what sort of evidence you think
there should be you have no idea at all. LOL...as is often the case, you
people's position is hilarious!
You know what evidence is.
When I first began challenging you people I thought some of you might
actually have some clue what you thought you were trying to talk about, and
would try to explain what you think it is. But by now we've seen that none of
you have any idea what you think you're trying to talk about when you demand
evidence. You don't have any idea WHAT sort of evidence you think there should
be, WHERE you think it should be, or WHY you think it should be to God's benefit
to provide it if he exists. You also can't appreciate why God would not provide
proof of his existence. You're not capable of actually thinking about this
topic.
You really have no idea what you are talking about and clearly don't
care how ignorant or deluded you are.
We know the things I pointed out are true and you can't even attempt to
pretend that they're not.
No, your claims are not true. How silly do you think we are?
The things I pointed out are true which is why you can't even try to pretend
that they're not. There is some question as to whether you're really stupid
enough to believe they're not true, but the fact that you can't make any attempt
to pretend they aren't true strongly suggests you're not honestly stupid enough
to believe they aren't. If you were then you'd try to give examples as to what
makes them incorrect. Since you can't do that it pretty much reveals that you're
not stupid enough to believe what you claim, but instead are dishonestly
pretending to be more stupid than you actually are. This is a very common
position for you people to be in, and one that you almost always wind up in at
some point along the way.
m***@.not.
2014-09-05 18:44:08 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 03 Sep 2014 18:27:00 -0600, Uergil <***@uer.net> wrote:
.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Wisely Non-Theist
Post by m***@.not.
the atheist has conditioned himself to suppress the knowledge of God within himself as
we read in v.18 and following of Romans chapter one... he's his own worse enemy hating the fact that
God has exposed his inner, secret thoughts making such... public knowledge.
.
They expose their own thoughts making it known that they believe God does
not exist, yet most of them are ashamed of and want to deny that belief even
after they have made it clear that they have it.
Spam.
It's a fact that the majority of atheists I've encountered who clearly
appear to believe God does not exist, are ashamed to admit it. VERY few have not
been ashamed to admit it.
The majority of atheists who are honest enough to admit to being
atheists are not ashamed to admit not believing any gods exist.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists want
to dishonestly deny that they have any belief.
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist, but are not certain
because they cannot absolutely prove it.
Some atheists are stupid enough to think they know God doesn't exist:

"I have admitted numerous times that I *KNOW* there is not god. On this planet
or any others for that matter." - ***@m.nu

"I know that gods are merely a figment of your deluded imagination" - Smiler

"I showed an example of evidence that proves god does not exist." - Malte Runz

"The gods of the theists who bother us here don't exist, even in non-god form."
- Free Lunch

"As I said .. if the evidence is NOT where it should be if the proposition
were true, then means the proposition is not true." - "Wizard-Of-Oz"

"If a god really existed there would be no reason to have 'evidence' of his
existence. It would be apparent to all. No need to question because all sorts of
Post by Uergil
Those who claim otherwise have no idea what atheists are like!
"If a person can not say with 100% clarity that they know that there is no god
that there will never be a god and there has never been a god, then that person
is NOT an atheist." - ***@m.nu

"if You have FAITH OF ANYKIND whatsoever about weather god exists you
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Wisely Non-Theist
It is only those hypocritical closet-atheists who pretend to be theists
because of family pressures or social pressure who do not publicly admit
their real beliefs.
I don't recall having encountered anyone like that, but I've encountered
several atheists who have made it clear they believe God does not exist, and
then have later tried to deny having any belief. What's in question is why they
are ashamed of their own belief instead of content with it, if not proud of it.
The idiot child bilgat is ashamed of his belief but goes on to an even more
idiotic position trying to persuade people that he somehow found out God does
not exist. He amusingly and very stupidly wants people to believe that his own
personal belief, or guess, is somehow "knowledge". Hilarious!
Post by Wisely Non-Theist
Post by m***@.not.
By your own response to what I pointed out you make it
clear that you are ashamed of the situation yourself.
m***@.not.
2014-09-25 22:34:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none associated with this planet
or star system?
Free Lunch
2014-09-25 23:10:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
m***@.not.
2014-09-29 01:05:40 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 18:10:14 -0500, Free Lunch <***@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
R.Dean
2014-10-06 22:27:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore there can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of
matter.
Free Lunch
2014-10-06 23:49:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore there can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
R.Dean
2014-10-07 02:45:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore there can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
I simply stated facts.
felix_unger
2014-10-07 04:06:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 18:10:14 -0500, Free Lunch
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore there can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
I simply stated facts.
atheists don't like facts that don't fit with atheism
--
rgds,

Pete
-------
It's not about Islam!.. http://ausnet.info/pics/islam.png
Islam is a religion of peace!.. http://thereligionofpeace.com
http://pamelageller.com/
β€œThe future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam” - Barack Hussein Obama
Free Lunch
2014-10-08 01:12:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore there can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
I simply stated facts.
Religious claims are not facts.
R.Dean
2014-10-08 04:02:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore there can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
I simply stated facts.
Religious claims are not facts.
What about the above statement, in you opinion, does not portend facts?
Free Lunch
2014-10-09 00:12:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore there can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
I simply stated facts.
Religious claims are not facts.
What about the above statement, in you opinion, does not portend facts?
The idea that there a nonexistent things that can be studied.
R.Dean
2014-10-09 20:02:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore there can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
I simply stated facts.
Religious claims are not facts.
What about the above statement, in you opinion, does not portend facts?
The idea that there a nonexistent things that can be studied.
By non existent things, you mean non-material. It's arrogance to assert
there are no non-existent things, since by things we concede that such
is made up of matter, and no Jews or Christians believe that deity
consist of matter. So what you wrote has no significence to the
christian, but for you, it's strictly self gratification.
August Rode
2014-10-09 20:41:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 18:10:14 -0500, Free Lunch
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief.
Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean
believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist
many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none
associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there
"should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's
benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore there can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
I simply stated facts.
Religious claims are not facts.
What about the above statement, in you opinion, does not portend facts?
The idea that there a nonexistent things that can be studied.
By non existent things, you mean non-material.
I'm pretty sure he meant nonexistent.
Post by R.Dean
It's arrogance to assert
there are no non-existent things,
If you can demonstrate that any nonexistent thing exists, go for it.
Post by R.Dean
since by things we concede that such
is made up of matter, and no Jews or Christians believe that deity
consist of matter. So what you wrote has no significence to the
christian, but for you, it's strictly self gratification.
R.Dean
2014-10-10 15:24:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 18:10:14 -0500, Free Lunch
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief.
Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean
believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist
many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none
associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there
"should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's
benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore there can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
I simply stated facts.
Religious claims are not facts.
What about the above statement, in you opinion, does not portend facts?
The idea that there a nonexistent things that can be studied.
By non existent things, you mean non-material.
I'm pretty sure he meant nonexistent.
Post by R.Dean
It's arrogance to assert
there are no non-existent things,
If you can demonstrate that any nonexistent thing exists, go for it.
A contradiction in terms - you demand evidence of the existence of
non-existing things? This is the equivalent of demanding funds in a
non-existent bank account. This is demanding the impossible.
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
since by things we concede that such
is made up of matter, and no Jews or Christians believe that deity
consist of matter. So what you wrote has no significence to the
christian, but for you, it's strictly self gratification.
August Rode
2014-10-10 17:50:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 18:10:14 -0500, Free Lunch
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief.
Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean
believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist
many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none
associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there
"should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's
benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore there can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
I simply stated facts.
Religious claims are not facts.
What about the above statement, in you opinion, does not portend facts?
The idea that there a nonexistent things that can be studied.
By non existent things, you mean non-material.
I'm pretty sure he meant nonexistent.
Post by R.Dean
It's arrogance to assert
there are no non-existent things,
If you can demonstrate that any nonexistent thing exists, go for it.
A contradiction in terms - you demand evidence of the existence of
non-existing things? This is the equivalent of demanding funds in a
non-existent bank account. This is demanding the impossible.
Then why did you say, "It's arrogance to assert there are no
non-existent things"? The statement implies that you think that some
non-existent things exist which, as you've correctly pointed out, is a
contradiction in terms.
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
since by things we concede that such
is made up of matter, and no Jews or Christians believe that deity
consist of matter. So what you wrote has no significence to the
christian, but for you, it's strictly self gratification.
R.Dean
2014-10-10 18:39:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 18:10:14 -0500, Free Lunch
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief.
Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean
believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist
many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none
associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there
"should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's
benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore there can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
I simply stated facts.
Religious claims are not facts.
What about the above statement, in you opinion, does not portend facts?
The idea that there a nonexistent things that can be studied.
By non existent things, you mean non-material.
I'm pretty sure he meant nonexistent.
Post by R.Dean
It's arrogance to assert
there are no non-existent things,
If you can demonstrate that any nonexistent thing exists, go for it.
A contradiction in terms - you demand evidence of the existence of
non-existing things? This is the equivalent of demanding funds in a
non-existent bank account. This is demanding the impossible.
Then why did you say, "It's arrogance to assert there are no
non-existent things"? The statement implies that you think that some
non-existent things exist which, as you've correctly pointed out, is a
contradiction in terms.
I think the continued use the term "non-existent" instead of
"non-material" is arrogance, since non-existent does not apply where
Christians are concerned. In my view, It's strictly an anti-religious
proclivity.
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
since by things we concede that such
is made up of matter, and no Jews or Christians believe that deity
consist of matter. So what you wrote has no significence to the
christian, but for you, it's strictly self gratification.
August Rode
2014-10-10 19:33:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
On Mon, 06 Oct 2014 18:27:42 -0400, "R.Dean" <"R.
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 18:10:14 -0500, Free Lunch
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief.
Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean
believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist
many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none
associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there
"should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's
benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore
there
can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
I simply stated facts.
Religious claims are not facts.
What about the above statement, in you opinion, does not portend facts?
The idea that there a nonexistent things that can be studied.
By non existent things, you mean non-material.
I'm pretty sure he meant nonexistent.
Post by R.Dean
It's arrogance to assert
there are no non-existent things,
If you can demonstrate that any nonexistent thing exists, go for it.
A contradiction in terms - you demand evidence of the existence of
non-existing things? This is the equivalent of demanding funds in a
non-existent bank account. This is demanding the impossible.
Then why did you say, "It's arrogance to assert there are no
non-existent things"? The statement implies that you think that some
non-existent things exist which, as you've correctly pointed out, is a
contradiction in terms.
I think the continued use the term "non-existent" instead of
"non-material" is arrogance, since non-existent does not apply where
Christians are concerned.
It doesn't? Surely either something exists or it doesn't, right?
Believing that God exists doesn't automatically mean that God exists,
right?
Post by R.Dean
In my view, It's strictly an anti-religious
proclivity.
In the same way that continuing to claim that God exists is a religious
proclivity?
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
since by things we concede that such
is made up of matter, and no Jews or Christians believe that deity
consist of matter. So what you wrote has no significence to the
christian, but for you, it's strictly self gratification.
R.Dean
2014-10-10 22:52:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
On Mon, 06 Oct 2014 18:27:42 -0400, "R.Dean" <"R.
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 18:10:14 -0500, Free Lunch
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no
belief.
Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean
believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods
exist
many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none
associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there
"should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's
benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural
occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific
method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore
there
can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not
consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
I simply stated facts.
Religious claims are not facts.
What about the above statement, in you opinion, does not portend facts?
The idea that there a nonexistent things that can be studied.
By non existent things, you mean non-material.
I'm pretty sure he meant nonexistent.
Post by R.Dean
It's arrogance to assert
there are no non-existent things,
If you can demonstrate that any nonexistent thing exists, go for it.
A contradiction in terms - you demand evidence of the existence of
non-existing things? This is the equivalent of demanding funds in a
non-existent bank account. This is demanding the impossible.
Then why did you say, "It's arrogance to assert there are no
non-existent things"? The statement implies that you think that some
non-existent things exist which, as you've correctly pointed out, is a
contradiction in terms.
I think the continued use the term "non-existent" instead of
"non-material" is arrogance, since non-existent does not apply where
Christians are concerned.
It doesn't? Surely either something exists or it doesn't, right?
Believing that God exists doesn't automatically mean that God exists,
right?
Post by R.Dean
In my view, It's strictly an anti-religious
proclivity.
In the same way that continuing to claim that God exists is a religious
proclivity?
Who is this in reference to? Who _claims_ that God exist?
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
since by things we concede that such
is made up of matter, and no Jews or Christians believe that deity
consist of matter. So what you wrote has no significence to the
christian, but for you, it's strictly self gratification.
August Rode
2014-10-11 00:48:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
On Mon, 06 Oct 2014 22:45:46 -0400, "R.Dean" <"R.
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
On Mon, 06 Oct 2014 18:27:42 -0400, "R.Dean" <"R.
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 18:10:14 -0500, Free Lunch
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no
belief.
Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could
mean
believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods
exist
many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none
associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there
"should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's
benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural
occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific
method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore
there
can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not
consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
I simply stated facts.
Religious claims are not facts.
What about the above statement, in you opinion, does not portend facts?
The idea that there a nonexistent things that can be studied.
By non existent things, you mean non-material.
I'm pretty sure he meant nonexistent.
Post by R.Dean
It's arrogance to assert
there are no non-existent things,
If you can demonstrate that any nonexistent thing exists, go for it.
A contradiction in terms - you demand evidence of the existence of
non-existing things? This is the equivalent of demanding funds in a
non-existent bank account. This is demanding the impossible.
Then why did you say, "It's arrogance to assert there are no
non-existent things"? The statement implies that you think that some
non-existent things exist which, as you've correctly pointed out, is a
contradiction in terms.
I think the continued use the term "non-existent" instead of
"non-material" is arrogance, since non-existent does not apply where
Christians are concerned.
It doesn't? Surely either something exists or it doesn't, right?
Believing that God exists doesn't automatically mean that God exists,
right?
Hmm... you don't seem to like answering questions. Is there a particular
reason for that?
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
In my view, It's strictly an anti-religious
proclivity.
In the same way that continuing to claim that God exists is a religious
proclivity?
Who is this in reference to? Who _claims_ that God exist?
Unless I miss my guess, *all* Christians do. There's really not much
reason to be a Christian if God doesn't exist, is there?
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
since by things we concede that such
is made up of matter, and no Jews or Christians believe that deity
consist of matter. So what you wrote has no significence to the
christian, but for you, it's strictly self gratification.
R.Dean
2014-10-11 03:06:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
On Mon, 06 Oct 2014 22:45:46 -0400, "R.Dean" <"R.
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
On Mon, 06 Oct 2014 18:27:42 -0400, "R.Dean" <"R.
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 18:10:14 -0500, Free Lunch
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
On Wed, 03 Sep 2014 18:27:00 -0600, Uergil
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no
belief.
Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could
mean
believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods
exist
many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none
associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there
"should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's
benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural
occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific
method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore
there
can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not
consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that
people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
I simply stated facts.
Religious claims are not facts.
What about the above statement, in you opinion, does not portend facts?
The idea that there a nonexistent things that can be studied.
By non existent things, you mean non-material.
I'm pretty sure he meant nonexistent.
Post by R.Dean
It's arrogance to assert
there are no non-existent things,
If you can demonstrate that any nonexistent thing exists, go for it.
A contradiction in terms - you demand evidence of the existence of
non-existing things? This is the equivalent of demanding funds in a
non-existent bank account. This is demanding the impossible.
Then why did you say, "It's arrogance to assert there are no
non-existent things"? The statement implies that you think that some
non-existent things exist which, as you've correctly pointed out, is a
contradiction in terms.
I think the continued use the term "non-existent" instead of
"non-material" is arrogance, since non-existent does not apply where
Christians are concerned.
It doesn't? Surely either something exists or it doesn't, right?
Believing that God exists doesn't automatically mean that God exists,
right?
Hmm... you don't seem to like answering questions. Is there a particular
reason for that?
We've addressed this before. I've never _claimed_ it does. When you
demand natural explanations for everything how is this resolved?
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
In my view, It's strictly an anti-religious
proclivity.
In the same way that continuing to claim that God exists is a religious
proclivity?
Who is this in reference to? Who _claims_ that God exist?
Unless I miss my guess, *all* Christians do. There's really not much
reason to be a Christian if God doesn't exist, is there?
Christians _believe_ God exist. They cannot prove he does. It's a matter
primarily of faith.
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
since by things we concede that such
is made up of matter, and no Jews or Christians believe that deity
consist of matter. So what you wrote has no significence to the
christian, but for you, it's strictly self gratification.
August Rode
2014-10-11 12:33:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
On Wed, 08 Oct 2014 00:02:55 -0400, "R.Dean" <"R.
Post by R.Dean
On Mon, 06 Oct 2014 22:45:46 -0400, "R.Dean" <"R.
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
On Mon, 06 Oct 2014 18:27:42 -0400, "R.Dean" <"R.
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 18:10:14 -0500, Free Lunch
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
On Wed, 03 Sep 2014 18:27:00 -0600, Uergil
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no
belief.
Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could
mean
believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods
exist
many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none
associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there
"should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to
God's
benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural
occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific
method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore
there
can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not
consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that
people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
I simply stated facts.
Religious claims are not facts.
What about the above statement, in you opinion, does not portend facts?
The idea that there a nonexistent things that can be studied.
By non existent things, you mean non-material.
I'm pretty sure he meant nonexistent.
Post by R.Dean
It's arrogance to assert
there are no non-existent things,
If you can demonstrate that any nonexistent thing exists, go for it.
A contradiction in terms - you demand evidence of the existence of
non-existing things? This is the equivalent of demanding funds in a
non-existent bank account. This is demanding the impossible.
Then why did you say, "It's arrogance to assert there are no
non-existent things"? The statement implies that you think that some
non-existent things exist which, as you've correctly pointed out, is a
contradiction in terms.
I think the continued use the term "non-existent" instead of
"non-material" is arrogance, since non-existent does not apply where
Christians are concerned.
It doesn't? Surely either something exists or it doesn't, right?
Believing that God exists doesn't automatically mean that God exists,
right?
Hmm... you don't seem to like answering questions. Is there a particular
reason for that?
We've addressed this before. I've never _claimed_ it does.
That's correct but that isn't an answer to my question. Not even
remotely. Here it is again in a slightly different form:

Does belief in the truth of a claim mean that
the claim is true?
Post by R.Dean
When you
demand natural explanations for everything how is this resolved?
I'll say the same thing to you that I've told others, that I'd accept a
sound argument in place of natural explanations.
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
In my view, It's strictly an anti-religious
proclivity.
In the same way that continuing to claim that God exists is a religious
proclivity?
Who is this in reference to? Who _claims_ that God exist?
Unless I miss my guess, *all* Christians do. There's really not much
reason to be a Christian if God doesn't exist, is there?
Christians _believe_ God exist.
Many of them _claim_ that God exists. However, for those that don't make
such a claim overtly, believing that God exists is identical to
believing that the claim "God exists" is true. No matter which way you
cut it, Christians hold a definite position on the claim that God
exists. You'll have to forgive me if I don't see much difference between
making a claim and believing a claim to be true.
Post by R.Dean
They cannot prove he does.
Correct. That doesn't seem to stop many of them from trying, though.
Some of them brandish the argument from design as if it was intended to
demonstrate something.
Post by R.Dean
It's a matter
primarily of faith.
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
since by things we concede that such
is made up of matter, and no Jews or Christians believe that deity
consist of matter. So what you wrote has no significence to the
christian, but for you, it's strictly self gratification.
R.Dean
2014-10-12 03:01:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
On Wed, 08 Oct 2014 00:02:55 -0400, "R.Dean" <"R.
Post by R.Dean
On Mon, 06 Oct 2014 22:45:46 -0400, "R.Dean" <"R.
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
On Mon, 06 Oct 2014 18:27:42 -0400, "R.Dean" <"R.
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 18:10:14 -0500, Free Lunch
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
On Wed, 03 Sep 2014 18:27:00 -0600, Uergil
Post by Info
In article
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no
belief.
Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could
mean
believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods
exist
many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none
associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think
there
"should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to
God's
benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural
occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific
method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore
there
can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not
consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that
people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
I simply stated facts.
Religious claims are not facts.
What about the above statement, in you opinion, does not
portend
facts?
The idea that there a nonexistent things that can be studied.
By non existent things, you mean non-material.
I'm pretty sure he meant nonexistent.
Post by R.Dean
It's arrogance to assert
there are no non-existent things,
If you can demonstrate that any nonexistent thing exists, go for it.
A contradiction in terms - you demand evidence of the existence of
non-existing things? This is the equivalent of demanding funds in a
non-existent bank account. This is demanding the impossible.
Then why did you say, "It's arrogance to assert there are no
non-existent things"? The statement implies that you think that some
non-existent things exist which, as you've correctly pointed out, is a
contradiction in terms.
I think the continued use the term "non-existent" instead of
"non-material" is arrogance, since non-existent does not apply where
Christians are concerned.
It doesn't? Surely either something exists or it doesn't, right?
Believing that God exists doesn't automatically mean that God exists,
right?
Hmm... you don't seem to like answering questions. Is there a particular
reason for that?
We've addressed this before. I've never _claimed_ it does.
That's correct but that isn't an answer to my question. Not even
Does belief in the truth of a claim mean that
the claim is true?
Not in and of itself. Regardless of how strong one's believes in the
fidelity of one's mate, that doesn't mean he/she is faithful.
Neither does it mean he/she is not.
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
When you
demand natural explanations for everything how is this resolved?
I'll say the same thing to you that I've told others, that I'd accept a
sound argument in place of natural explanations.
Forgive me, but I question that statement.
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
In my view, It's strictly an anti-religious
proclivity.
In the same way that continuing to claim that God exists is a religious
proclivity?
Who is this in reference to? Who _claims_ that God exist?
Unless I miss my guess, *all* Christians do. There's really not much
reason to be a Christian if God doesn't exist, is there?
Christians _believe_ God exist.
Many of them _claim_ that God exists. However, for those that don't make
such a claim overtly, believing that God exists is identical to
believing that the claim "God exists" is true. No matter which way you
cut it, Christians hold a definite position on the claim that God
exists. You'll have to forgive me if I don't see much difference between
making a claim and believing a claim to be true.
The point is, and most Christians will tell you that it all comes down
to a matter of faith. You cannot _know_.
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
They cannot prove he does.
Correct. That doesn't seem to stop many of them from trying, though.
Some of them brandish the argument from design as if it was intended to
demonstrate something.
If one does not have an apriori and overriding adherence to naturalism.
then design could be seen as indirect evidence of a designer. However,
if design is disallowed up front and not allowed to show up for the
game, then it's not even in play. Naturalism may NOT be the better
explanation, nevertheless, it wins, but _only_ through default.
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
It's a matter
primarily of faith.
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
since by things we concede that such
is made up of matter, and no Jews or Christians believe that deity
consist of matter. So what you wrote has no significence to the
christian, but for you, it's strictly self gratification.
Malte Runz
2014-10-12 11:45:18 UTC
Permalink
"R.Dean" skrev i meddelelsen news:bam_v.409144$***@fx32.fr7...

(snip)
Post by R.Dean
If one does not have an apriori and overriding adherence to naturalism.
then design could be seen as indirect evidence of a designer. However,
if design is disallowed up front and not allowed to show up for the game,
then it's not even in play. Naturalism may NOT be the better explanation,
nevertheless, it wins, but _only_ through default.
'The eye is sooo complicated, it just has to be the result of design, hence
a designer must have been involved. He also fine tuned the Universe!!!'
Sure...

Design is not "disallowed". Are you pulling a Ben Stein on us? Design is
simply not seen/found/present in nature. But 'naturalistic explanations'
are, and that's what makes them the only game in town. All attempts to show
the contrary have failed miserably, but you're welcome to have a go at it.
--
Malte Runz
August Rode
2014-10-12 13:19:44 UTC
Permalink
<snip>
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
I think the continued use the term "non-existent" instead of
"non-material" is arrogance, since non-existent does not apply where
Christians are concerned.
It doesn't? Surely either something exists or it doesn't, right?
Believing that God exists doesn't automatically mean that God exists,
right?
Hmm... you don't seem to like answering questions. Is there a particular
reason for that?
We've addressed this before. I've never _claimed_ it does.
That's correct but that isn't an answer to my question. Not even
Does belief in the truth of a claim mean that
the claim is true?
Not in and of itself. Regardless of how strong one's believes in the
fidelity of one's mate, that doesn't mean he/she is faithful.
Neither does it mean he/she is not.
Absolutely correct. Regardless of how strongly one believes in the
existence of God, that doesn't mean that God exists. Nor does it mean
that God does not exist. So clearly belief is irrelevant when it comes
to existential claims.
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
When you
demand natural explanations for everything how is this resolved?
I'll say the same thing to you that I've told others, that I'd accept a
sound argument in place of natural explanations.
Forgive me, but I question that statement.
I'm sorry but it's true. I have yet to see any argument from a Christian
about the truth of some aspect of Christianity that doesn't have a
logical fallacy at its heart.
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
In my view, It's strictly an anti-religious
proclivity.
In the same way that continuing to claim that God exists is a religious
proclivity?
Who is this in reference to? Who _claims_ that God exist?
Unless I miss my guess, *all* Christians do. There's really not much
reason to be a Christian if God doesn't exist, is there?
Christians _believe_ God exist.
Many of them _claim_ that God exists. However, for those that don't make
such a claim overtly, believing that God exists is identical to
believing that the claim "God exists" is true. No matter which way you
cut it, Christians hold a definite position on the claim that God
exists. You'll have to forgive me if I don't see much difference between
making a claim and believing a claim to be true.
The point is, and most Christians will tell you that it all comes down
to a matter of faith. You cannot _know_.
And yet many have told me that they *do* know.
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
They cannot prove he does.
Correct. That doesn't seem to stop many of them from trying, though.
Some of them brandish the argument from design as if it was intended to
demonstrate something.
If one does not have an apriori and overriding adherence to naturalism.
then design could be seen as indirect evidence of a designer.
So if one believes that a designer exists, design could be seen as
indirect evidence of that designer. And you don't see a problem with
that logic? (Hint: assuming your conclusion)
Post by R.Dean
However,
if design is disallowed up front and not allowed to show up for the
game, then it's not even in play.
Design is allowed provided that it can be shown to be a cognitive action
rather than simply emerging from natural processes. Showing that design
in nature has its roots in cognition is the step that lacks a sound
argument.
Post by R.Dean
Naturalism may NOT be the better
explanation, nevertheless, it wins, but _only_ through default.
Supernaturalism doesn't offer any explanations, does it? If it does, how
can such explanations be tested?
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
It's a matter
primarily of faith.
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by R.Dean
since by things we concede that such
is made up of matter, and no Jews or Christians believe that deity
consist of matter. So what you wrote has no significence to the
christian, but for you, it's strictly self gratification.
Free Lunch
2014-10-11 16:23:12 UTC
Permalink
...
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
I think the continued use the term "non-existent" instead of
"non-material" is arrogance, since non-existent does not apply where
Christians are concerned.
It doesn't? Surely either something exists or it doesn't, right?
Believing that God exists doesn't automatically mean that God exists,
right?
Hmm... you don't seem to like answering questions. Is there a particular
reason for that?
We've addressed this before. I've never _claimed_ it does. When you
demand natural explanations for everything how is this resolved?
You'll need to show us what other explanations exist and how they work.
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
In my view, It's strictly an anti-religious
proclivity.
In the same way that continuing to claim that God exists is a religious
proclivity?
Who is this in reference to? Who _claims_ that God exist?
Unless I miss my guess, *all* Christians do. There's really not much
reason to be a Christian if God doesn't exist, is there?
Christians _believe_ God exist. They cannot prove he does. It's a matter
primarily of faith.
Why do so many of them insist that we believe what they know they cannot
back up?
R.Dean
2014-10-11 19:44:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
...
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
I think the continued use the term "non-existent" instead of
"non-material" is arrogance, since non-existent does not apply where
Christians are concerned.
It doesn't? Surely either something exists or it doesn't, right?
Believing that God exists doesn't automatically mean that God exists,
right?
Hmm... you don't seem to like answering questions. Is there a particular
reason for that?
We've addressed this before. I've never _claimed_ it does. When you
demand natural explanations for everything how is this resolved?
You'll need to show us what other explanations exist and how they work.
When you will accept nothing, but naturalistic explanations, It seems
you are not open to other explanations. But that's fine, it's your
right.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
In my view, It's strictly an anti-religious
proclivity.
In the same way that continuing to claim that God exists is a religious
proclivity?
Who is this in reference to? Who _claims_ that God exist?
Unless I miss my guess, *all* Christians do. There's really not much
reason to be a Christian if God doesn't exist, is there?
Christians _believe_ God exist. They cannot prove he does. It's a matter
primarily of faith.
Why do so many of them insist that we believe what they know they cannot
back up?
Maybe a few fundamentalist try, but the mainstream denominations don't
usually bother. They do not send missionaries to the western world.
Free Lunch
2014-10-11 23:08:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
...
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
I think the continued use the term "non-existent" instead of
"non-material" is arrogance, since non-existent does not apply where
Christians are concerned.
It doesn't? Surely either something exists or it doesn't, right?
Believing that God exists doesn't automatically mean that God exists,
right?
Hmm... you don't seem to like answering questions. Is there a particular
reason for that?
We've addressed this before. I've never _claimed_ it does. When you
demand natural explanations for everything how is this resolved?
You'll need to show us what other explanations exist and how they work.
When you will accept nothing, but naturalistic explanations, It seems
you are not open to other explanations. But that's fine, it's your
right.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
In my view, It's strictly an anti-religious
proclivity.
In the same way that continuing to claim that God exists is a religious
proclivity?
Who is this in reference to? Who _claims_ that God exist?
Unless I miss my guess, *all* Christians do. There's really not much
reason to be a Christian if God doesn't exist, is there?
Christians _believe_ God exist. They cannot prove he does. It's a matter
primarily of faith.
Why do so many of them insist that we believe what they know they cannot
back up?
Maybe a few fundamentalist try, but the mainstream denominations don't
usually bother. They do not send missionaries to the western world.
As long as the fundamentalists are not condemned as heretics by the
mainstream, the fundies feel empowered. The religion doesn't matter.
Fundy Christians are no better than the Islamic State.
R.Dean
2014-10-12 01:13:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
...
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
I think the continued use the term "non-existent" instead of
"non-material" is arrogance, since non-existent does not apply where
Christians are concerned.
It doesn't? Surely either something exists or it doesn't, right?
Believing that God exists doesn't automatically mean that God exists,
right?
Hmm... you don't seem to like answering questions. Is there a particular
reason for that?
We've addressed this before. I've never _claimed_ it does. When you
demand natural explanations for everything how is this resolved?
You'll need to show us what other explanations exist and how they work.
When you will accept nothing, but naturalistic explanations, It seems
you are not open to other explanations. But that's fine, it's your
right.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
In my view, It's strictly an anti-religious
proclivity.
In the same way that continuing to claim that God exists is a religious
proclivity?
Who is this in reference to? Who _claims_ that God exist?
Unless I miss my guess, *all* Christians do. There's really not much
reason to be a Christian if God doesn't exist, is there?
Christians _believe_ God exist. They cannot prove he does. It's a matter
primarily of faith.
Why do so many of them insist that we believe what they know they cannot
back up?
Maybe a few fundamentalist try, but the mainstream denominations don't
usually bother. They do not send missionaries to the western world.
As long as the fundamentalists are not condemned as heretics by the
mainstream, the fundies feel empowered. The religion doesn't matter.
Fundy Christians are no better than the Islamic State.
Islamic State? That would be Isis. I don't see Fundy Christian marching
into cities and slaughtering people. I've yet to see a Christian suicide
bomber, nor have I heard of a Fundy Christian who beheaded another
person. While Fundy Christians send missionaries into Africa, and other
places, they do not demand "convert or die". In a Christian land you can
criticize Christianity, Jesus Christ, or the Pope
with no fear being killed. But you will not criticize the Islamic
Prophet in an Islamic State with equal impunity.
Free Lunch
2014-10-10 21:33:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 18:10:14 -0500, Free Lunch
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief.
Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean
believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist
many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none
associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there
"should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's
benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore there
can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
I simply stated facts.
Religious claims are not facts.
What about the above statement, in you opinion, does not portend facts?
The idea that there a nonexistent things that can be studied.
By non existent things, you mean non-material.
I'm pretty sure he meant nonexistent.
Post by R.Dean
It's arrogance to assert
there are no non-existent things,
If you can demonstrate that any nonexistent thing exists, go for it.
A contradiction in terms - you demand evidence of the existence of
non-existing things? This is the equivalent of demanding funds in a
non-existent bank account. This is demanding the impossible.
Then why did you say, "It's arrogance to assert there are no
non-existent things"? The statement implies that you think that some
non-existent things exist which, as you've correctly pointed out, is a
contradiction in terms.
I think the continued use the term "non-existent" instead of
"non-material" is arrogance, since non-existent does not apply where
Christians are concerned. In my view, It's strictly an anti-religious
proclivity.
Feel free to show us that non-material things are different from
non-existent things.
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
since by things we concede that such
is made up of matter, and no Jews or Christians believe that deity
consist of matter. So what you wrote has no significence to the
christian, but for you, it's strictly self gratification.
Free Lunch
2014-10-10 21:33:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 18:10:14 -0500, Free Lunch
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief.
Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean
believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist
many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none
associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there
"should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's
benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore there can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
I simply stated facts.
Religious claims are not facts.
What about the above statement, in you opinion, does not portend facts?
The idea that there a nonexistent things that can be studied.
By non existent things, you mean non-material.
I'm pretty sure he meant nonexistent.
Post by R.Dean
It's arrogance to assert
there are no non-existent things,
If you can demonstrate that any nonexistent thing exists, go for it.
A contradiction in terms - you demand evidence of the existence of
non-existing things?
You claim they exist even though you also claim they don't.
Post by R.Dean
This is the equivalent of demanding funds in a
non-existent bank account. This is demanding the impossible.
This is your problem. You need to demonstrate that your "non-material"
things are different from non-existent before you get to the next step.
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
since by things we concede that such
is made up of matter, and no Jews or Christians believe that deity
consist of matter. So what you wrote has no significence to the
christian, but for you, it's strictly self gratification.
Free Lunch
2014-10-09 22:11:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore there can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
I simply stated facts.
Religious claims are not facts.
What about the above statement, in you opinion, does not portend facts?
The idea that there a nonexistent things that can be studied.
By non existent things, you mean non-material. It's arrogance to assert
there are no non-existent things, since by things we concede that such
is made up of matter, and no Jews or Christians believe that deity
consist of matter. So what you wrote has no significence to the
christian, but for you, it's strictly self gratification.
I don't really care what believers believe when their beliefs rely on no
facts, no evidence.
m***@.not.
2014-10-09 00:26:32 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 08 Oct 2014 00:02:55 -0400, "R.Dean" <"R. Dean"@gmail.com> wrote:
.
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore there can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
I simply stated facts.
Religious claims are not facts.
What about the above statement, in you opinion, does not portend facts?
One fact that throws a shadow of doubt on your supposed facts is the fact
that you not only don't have any idea whether deities are composed of matter or
not, but you don't even have any way of TRYING TO find out. All you have is
faith that your guess is correct, but no reason for it.
R.Dean
2014-10-09 20:46:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore there can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
I simply stated facts.
Religious claims are not facts.
What about the above statement, in you opinion, does not portend facts?
One fact that throws a shadow of doubt on your supposed facts is the fact
that you not only don't have any idea whether deities are composed of matter or
not,
.
you're missing the point, in a later post as was pointed out, this is a
christian dogma going back for hundreds of centuries. And whether true
or not, this is a fact!
.
but you don't even have any way of TRYING TO find out. All you have is
faith that your guess is correct, but no reason for it.
.
As has been pointed out before, modern science has self imposed
restrictions and limitations on itself. Science restricts itself
strictly to naturalism - the material universe and energy, thus science
can say nothing about religious matters. if you are looking for solid,
empirical evidence, of spiritual entities, you will not find it, it's
outside the realm on scientific inquiry - unless you afford the god-like
attributes of omnipotence, all-knowing and omniscient to the scientific
edifice.
August Rode
2014-10-09 20:52:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 18:10:14 -0500, Free Lunch
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief.
Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean
believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist
many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none
associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there
"should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's
benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore there can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
I simply stated facts.
Religious claims are not facts.
What about the above statement, in you opinion, does not portend facts?
One fact that throws a shadow of doubt on your supposed facts is the fact
that you not only don't have any idea whether deities are composed of matter or
not,
.
you're missing the point, in a later post as was pointed out, this is a
christian dogma going back for hundreds of centuries. And whether true
or not, this is a fact!
.
but you don't even have any way of TRYING TO find out. All you have is
faith that your guess is correct, but no reason for it.
.
As has been pointed out before, modern science has self imposed
restrictions and limitations on itself. Science restricts itself
strictly to naturalism - the material universe and energy, thus science
can say nothing about religious matters. if you are looking for solid,
empirical evidence, of spiritual entities, you will not find it, it's
outside the realm on scientific inquiry
Provided, of course, that these spiritual entities interact with the
material universe in no way whatsoever. Of course, if that was true then
such entities would be inherently undetectable and there is, in
principle, no difference between the undetectable and the nonexistent.
Post by R.Dean
- unless you afford the god-like
attributes of omnipotence, all-knowing and omniscient to the scientific
edifice.
R.Dean
2014-10-10 16:01:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 18:10:14 -0500, Free Lunch
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief.
Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean
believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist
many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none
associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there
"should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's
benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore there can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
I simply stated facts.
Religious claims are not facts.
What about the above statement, in you opinion, does not portend facts?
One fact that throws a shadow of doubt on your supposed facts is the fact
that you not only don't have any idea whether deities are composed of matter or
not,
.
you're missing the point, in a later post as was pointed out, this is a
christian dogma going back for hundreds of centuries. And whether true
or not, this is a fact!
.
but you don't even have any way of TRYING TO find out. All you have is
faith that your guess is correct, but no reason for it.
.
As has been pointed out before, modern science has self imposed
restrictions and limitations on itself. Science restricts itself
strictly to naturalism - the material universe and energy, thus science
can say nothing about religious matters. if you are looking for solid,
empirical evidence, of spiritual entities, you will not find it, it's
outside the realm on scientific inquiry
Provided, of course, that these spiritual entities interact with the
material universe in no way whatsoever. Of course, if that was true then
such entities would be inherently undetectable and there is, in
principle, no difference between the undetectable and the nonexistent.
When scientist holds as an apriori commitment to naturalism that only
natural explanations is acceptable_how_can_anyone_know_?

Yes, I agree this is absurd. However, is there some _indirect_
evidence which can be seen as intelligent involvement in the formation
of the universe and nature? There does exist, what certain scientist say
"appears" to be design in nature, however, you will find few, if any
scientist who will acknowledge this is _actual_ design. Design infers a
designer and so, an a priori consideration will not allow design in
Biologist, Richard Lowontin's words:
"we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an
apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material
explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying
to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we
cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door". -

Richard Lowontin
darwinianfundamentalism.blogspot.com/2005/07/darwinian-fundamentalist-manifesto.html
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
- unless you afford the god-like
attributes of omnipotence, all-knowing and omniscient to the scientific
edifice.
August Rode
2014-10-10 18:08:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 18:10:14 -0500, Free Lunch
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief.
Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean
believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist
many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none
associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there
"should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's
benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore there can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
I simply stated facts.
Religious claims are not facts.
What about the above statement, in you opinion, does not portend facts?
One fact that throws a shadow of doubt on your supposed facts is the fact
that you not only don't have any idea whether deities are composed of matter or
not,
.
you're missing the point, in a later post as was pointed out, this is a
christian dogma going back for hundreds of centuries. And whether true
or not, this is a fact!
.
but you don't even have any way of TRYING TO find out. All you have is
faith that your guess is correct, but no reason for it.
.
As has been pointed out before, modern science has self imposed
restrictions and limitations on itself. Science restricts itself
strictly to naturalism - the material universe and energy, thus science
can say nothing about religious matters. if you are looking for solid,
empirical evidence, of spiritual entities, you will not find it, it's
outside the realm on scientific inquiry
Provided, of course, that these spiritual entities interact with the
material universe in no way whatsoever. Of course, if that was true then
such entities would be inherently undetectable and there is, in
principle, no difference between the undetectable and the nonexistent.
When scientist holds as an apriori commitment to naturalism that only
natural explanations is acceptable_how_can_anyone_know_?
Yes, I agree this is absurd. However, is there some _indirect_
evidence which can be seen as intelligent involvement in the formation
of the universe and nature? There does exist, what certain scientist say
"appears" to be design in nature, however, you will find few, if any
scientist who will acknowledge this is _actual_ design. Design infers a
designer
It also infers a specific problem that the design addresses, assuming
that you're using "design" in a non-aesthetic sense. So tell me, what
problems does God have that he would need to design anything?
Post by R.Dean
and so, an a priori consideration will not allow design in
"we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an
apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material
explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying
to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we
cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door". -
That quote continues:
"The eminent Kant scholar Lewis Beck used to say
that anyone who could believe in God could believe
in anything. To appeal to an omnipotent deity is
to allow that at any moment the regularities of
nature may be ruptured, that miracles may happen."

What good is the development of an explanatory framework if it can't be
relied on?
Post by R.Dean
Richard Lowontin
darwinianfundamentalism.blogspot.com/2005/07/darwinian-fundamentalist-manifesto.html
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
- unless you afford the god-like
attributes of omnipotence, all-knowing and omniscient to the scientific
edifice.
R.Dean
2014-10-10 21:48:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 18:10:14 -0500, Free Lunch
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief.
Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean
believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist
many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none
associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there
"should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's
benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore there can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
I simply stated facts.
Religious claims are not facts.
What about the above statement, in you opinion, does not portend facts?
One fact that throws a shadow of doubt on your supposed facts is the fact
that you not only don't have any idea whether deities are composed of matter or
not,
.
you're missing the point, in a later post as was pointed out, this is a
christian dogma going back for hundreds of centuries. And whether true
or not, this is a fact!
.
but you don't even have any way of TRYING TO find out. All you have is
faith that your guess is correct, but no reason for it.
.
As has been pointed out before, modern science has self imposed
restrictions and limitations on itself. Science restricts itself
strictly to naturalism - the material universe and energy, thus science
can say nothing about religious matters. if you are looking for solid,
empirical evidence, of spiritual entities, you will not find it, it's
outside the realm on scientific inquiry
Provided, of course, that these spiritual entities interact with the
material universe in no way whatsoever. Of course, if that was true then
such entities would be inherently undetectable and there is, in
principle, no difference between the undetectable and the nonexistent.
When scientist holds as an apriori commitment to naturalism that only
natural explanations is acceptable_how_can_anyone_know_?
Yes, I agree this is absurd. However, is there some _indirect_
evidence which can be seen as intelligent involvement in the formation
of the universe and nature? There does exist, what certain scientist say
"appears" to be design in nature, however, you will find few, if any
scientist who will acknowledge this is _actual_ design. Design infers a
designer
It also infers a specific problem that the design addresses, assuming
that you're using "design" in a non-aesthetic sense. So tell me, what
problems does God have that he would need to design anything?
Post by R.Dean
and so, an a priori consideration will not allow design in
"we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an
apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material
explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying
to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we
cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door". -
"The eminent Kant scholar Lewis Beck used to say
that anyone who could believe in God could believe
in anything. To appeal to an omnipotent deity is
to allow that at any moment the regularities of
nature may be ruptured, that miracles may happen."
Nothing about this follow up altered the statement by Dr. Lewontin.
Naturalism is the apriori consideration.
Post by August Rode
What good is the development of an explanatory framework if it can't be
relied on?
Post by R.Dean
Richard Lowontin
darwinianfundamentalism.blogspot.com/2005/07/darwinian-fundamentalist-manifesto.html
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
- unless you afford the god-like
attributes of omnipotence, all-knowing and omniscient to the scientific
edifice.
August Rode
2014-10-11 00:45:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
On Mon, 06 Oct 2014 18:27:42 -0400, "R.Dean" <"R.
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 18:10:14 -0500, Free Lunch
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief.
Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean
believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist
many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none
associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there
"should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's
benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore
there
can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
I simply stated facts.
Religious claims are not facts.
What about the above statement, in you opinion, does not portend facts?
One fact that throws a shadow of doubt on your supposed facts is the fact
that you not only don't have any idea whether deities are composed of matter or
not,
.
you're missing the point, in a later post as was pointed out, this is a
christian dogma going back for hundreds of centuries. And whether true
or not, this is a fact!
.
but you don't even have any way of TRYING TO find out. All you have is
faith that your guess is correct, but no reason for it.
.
As has been pointed out before, modern science has self imposed
restrictions and limitations on itself. Science restricts itself
strictly to naturalism - the material universe and energy, thus science
can say nothing about religious matters. if you are looking for solid,
empirical evidence, of spiritual entities, you will not find it, it's
outside the realm on scientific inquiry
Provided, of course, that these spiritual entities interact with the
material universe in no way whatsoever. Of course, if that was true then
such entities would be inherently undetectable and there is, in
principle, no difference between the undetectable and the nonexistent.
When scientist holds as an apriori commitment to naturalism that only
natural explanations is acceptable_how_can_anyone_know_?
Yes, I agree this is absurd. However, is there some _indirect_
evidence which can be seen as intelligent involvement in the formation
of the universe and nature? There does exist, what certain scientist say
"appears" to be design in nature, however, you will find few, if any
scientist who will acknowledge this is _actual_ design. Design infers a
designer
It also infers a specific problem that the design addresses, assuming
that you're using "design" in a non-aesthetic sense. So tell me, what
problems does God have that he would need to design anything?
Ahem. No response?
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
and so, an a priori consideration will not allow design in
"we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an
apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material
explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying
to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we
cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door". -
"The eminent Kant scholar Lewis Beck used to say
that anyone who could believe in God could believe
in anything. To appeal to an omnipotent deity is
to allow that at any moment the regularities of
nature may be ruptured, that miracles may happen."
Nothing about this follow up altered the statement by Dr. Lewontin.
Naturalism is the apriori consideration.
Of course. There's a damn good reason for it. If the supernatural
(assuming that anything supernatural actually exists) were to be
considered, we couldn't explain *anything* with any confidence at all.
Post by R.Dean
Post by August Rode
What good is the development of an explanatory framework if it can't be
relied on?
Post by R.Dean
Richard Lowontin
darwinianfundamentalism.blogspot.com/2005/07/darwinian-fundamentalist-manifesto.html
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
- unless you afford the god-like
attributes of omnipotence, all-knowing and omniscient to the scientific
edifice.
Malte Runz
2014-10-12 11:45:10 UTC
Permalink
(snip)
Post by August Rode
Post by R.Dean
Nothing about this follow up altered the statement by Dr. Lewontin.
Naturalism is the apriori consideration.
Of course. There's a damn good reason for it. If the supernatural
(assuming that anything supernatural actually exists) were to be
considered, we couldn't explain *anything* with any confidence at all.
Often it boils down to 'All snowflakes are hexagonal, because God designed
them that way. Sure, there is also a naturalistic explanation, but it
doesn't disprove the design argument, and therefore the latter must be
regarded as an equally valid alternative.'
--
Malte Runz
m***@.not.
2014-10-09 00:26:38 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 07 Oct 2014 20:12:22 -0500, Free Lunch <***@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore there can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
I simply stated facts.
Religious claims are not facts.
You have no idea which of them are true and which of them are false, and
can't even appreciate a distinction because of the purity of your own faith in
your own personal guess being the correct possibility.
felix_unger
2014-10-07 03:57:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore there can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
you assume that ppl are making up stuff. how can you be sure that any
testimony regarding experiences of/with/from God is not about real
experiences? you can't. all you have is your belief. that is ALL you have.
--
rgds,

Pete
-------
It's not about Islam!.. http://ausnet.info/pics/islam.png
Islam is a religion of peace!.. http://thereligionofpeace.com
http://pamelageller.com/
β€œThe future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam” - Barack Hussein Obama
R.Dean
2014-10-07 16:48:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by felix_unger
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 18:10:14 -0500, Free Lunch
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore there can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
you assume that ppl are making up stuff. how can you be sure that any
testimony regarding experiences of/with/from God is not about real
experiences? you can't. all you have is your belief. that is ALL you have.
A few people have problems with the ancient concept of eternity. The
issue isn't whether the concept is fact or not. Because for thousands of
years, both Christians and Jews have maintained the belief that God is
eternal, without beginning or end. So, for a Christian the query
who created God is an irrational question which indicates an absence of
knowledge regarding that which they presume to be challenging.
m***@.not.
2014-10-09 00:26:20 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 07 Oct 2014 12:48:23 -0400, "R.Dean" <"R. Dean"@gmail.com> wrote:
.
Post by R.Dean
Post by felix_unger
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 18:10:14 -0500, Free Lunch
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean
believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none associated
with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore there can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
you assume that ppl are making up stuff. how can you be sure that any
testimony regarding experiences of/with/from God is not about real
experiences? you can't. all you have is your belief. that is ALL you have.
A few people have problems with the ancient concept of eternity. The
issue isn't whether the concept is fact or not. Because for thousands of
years, both Christians and Jews have maintained the belief that God is
eternal, without beginning or end. So, for a Christian the query
who created God is an irrational question which indicates an absence of
knowledge regarding that which they presume to be challenging.
When you get down to that issue it's no less or more fantastic a concept
whether God had anything to do with the creation of the universe or not. To say
he always existed is a copout I don't accept. To say the matter in the universe
always existed is similar from my pov. It seems most likely to me the matter
came first, but how and from where? The same is true for the energy. If the
universe is going through cycles of expansion and contraction then the same
matter and energy could have existed in varying conditions through a number of
different cycles, but still it had to come into existence at some point somehow.
If God came into existence at some point in these cycles and developed the
ability to influence the cycles themselves then that's a realistic, way we could
feel that he "created" the universe, but it brings up many more questions and
details to consider which are all far beyond the reckonings of people who can't
consider the possibility of God's existence in any realistic way at all.
m***@.not.
2014-10-09 00:26:26 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 07 Oct 2014 14:57:38 +1100, felix_unger <***@nothere.biz> wrote:
.
Post by felix_unger
Post by Free Lunch
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore there can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of
matter.
So you are objecting that science doesn't accept bullshit that people
make up and attribute to some god or other.
you assume that ppl are making up stuff. how can you be sure that any
testimony regarding experiences of/with/from God is not about real
experiences?
Today people can tell any lie they want to, say anything they want to, and
write anything they want to about how God had direct influence on them. They can
even openly proclaim themselves to be Gods and they won't get so much as a
misdemeanor for it. In the days when the books of the Bible were being put
together and people were making their testimonies about the things that happened
it was completely different. In those days people were killed for lying about
such things, or even for being suspected of lying about such things. Jesus was a
perfect example since after having performed many miracles in front of lots of
people he was still killed in a horrible way because they suspected he was
lying. It's amazing that the significance of such things are incomprehensible to
these atheists who like to consider themselves enough of an authority on the
subject to encourage other people to believe things that could damn them if
damnation exists. Again being evidence of God by being evidence of Satan's
influence on their minds. What else restricts them from being able to consider
such significant aspects of the situation?
Post by felix_unger
you can't. all you have is your belief. that is ALL you have.
Yes ALL they have is their own faith in their own belief, yet somehow
they're blinded to that very obvious fact. In their twisted and distorted minds
it somehow seems different than the clear and obvious fact it is. What causes
the distortion? The fact that it exists at all is again evidence of God by being
evidence of Satan's influence.
felix_unger
2014-10-07 04:04:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural
occurrence and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific
method has no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore
there can be no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does
not consist of matter.
atheists seem unable to appreciate the absurdity of asking for material
evidence of what is non-material and rejecting any non-material evidence
--
rgds,

Pete
-------
It's not about Islam!.. http://ausnet.info/pics/islam.png
Islam is a religion of peace!.. http://thereligionofpeace.com
http://pamelageller.com/
β€œThe future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam” - Barack Hussein Obama
R.Dean
2014-10-10 15:43:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by felix_unger
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural
occurrence and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific
method has no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore
there can be no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does
not consist of matter.
atheists seem unable to appreciate the absurdity of asking for material
evidence of what is non-material and rejecting any non-material evidence
Yes, I agree this is absurd. However, is there some _indirect_ evidence
which can be seen as intelligent involvement in the formation of the
universe and nature? There does exist, what certain scientist say
"appears" to be design in nature, however, you will find few, if any
scientist who will acknowledge this is _actual_ design. Design infers a
designer and so, an a priori consideration will not allow design:
"we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an
apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material
explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying
to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we
cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door". - Richard Lowontin
darwinianfundamentalism.blogspot.com/2005/07/darwinian-fundamentalist-manifesto.html
Free Lunch
2014-10-10 21:35:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by R.Dean
Post by felix_unger
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural
occurrence and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific
method has no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore
there can be no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does
not consist of matter.
atheists seem unable to appreciate the absurdity of asking for material
evidence of what is non-material and rejecting any non-material evidence
Yes, it is absurd to imply that non-material evidence exists.
Post by R.Dean
Yes, I agree this is absurd. However, is there some _indirect_ evidence
which can be seen as intelligent involvement in the formation of the
universe and nature? There does exist, what certain scientist say
"appears" to be design in nature, however, you will find few, if any
scientist who will acknowledge this is _actual_ design. Design infers a
Does Jack Frost design ice patterns?
Post by R.Dean
"we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an
apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material
explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying
to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we
cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door". - Richard Lowontin
darwinianfundamentalism.blogspot.com/2005/07/darwinian-fundamentalist-manifesto.html
Malte Runz
2014-10-07 10:32:31 UTC
Permalink
"R.Dean" skrev i meddelelsen news:tHEYv.412792$***@fx01.fr7...

(snip)
Post by R.Dean
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has no
capability to examine and study the unnatural; ...
Is there a method that can be used to examine "the unnatural"? How do you
know that "the unnatural" exists at all?
Post by R.Dean
... therefore there can be no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since
Deity does not consist of matter.
What does "Deity" consist of?
--
Malte Runz
m***@.not.
2014-10-09 00:26:14 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 06 Oct 2014 18:27:42 -0400, "R.Dean" <"R. Dean"@gmail.com> wrote:
.
Post by R.Dean
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Uergil
Post by m***@.not.
Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not believing
any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing no gods
exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many atheists
Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist
No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none associated with this planet
or star system?
There are zero gods that are supported by evidence.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural occurrence
and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific method has
no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore there can be
no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does not consist of
matter.
That's only one possibility, and one that I disbelieve. I believe if God
exists he has some material form, or forms. For all we know we ourselves are
part of it. There's no reason to believe God resides on the planet if he exists.
That means from our pov he must necessarily reside somewhere in space. How far
away? In what sort of environment? How could we detect it? Would YOU expect him
to orbit our little shit world in a huge spacecraft that humans could approach?
Maybe with a huge airlock or even rows upon rows of airlocks welcoming humans to
get up there and bother him 24/7? If he did, you can bet there would already be
regular flights into space with humans paying out the ass to go up there and
bother him non-stop with the flights booked solid. It might even result in
hotels on the moon where people could go and await their turn. If he really
wanted to make it easy for us he could put his craft in orbit around the moon,
to make it extra easy for people to go up there and bother him all the time....

But no. In fact he doesn't even give us actual proof of his existence. Why?
One possibility is that he doesn't exist at all. That's as far as you can go
with that one, so we're done with it. Another is that he knows it would change
things a whole lot if he did give proof of his existence. In fact HOW he
provided proof would be very significant as to how and how much things change.
Like if he got a virgin pregnant so she gave birth to "his son", then had the
lad grow up performing various miracles as evidence of the truth of it, and then
die a most horrible death to drive the point home but also as an invitation for
people on Earth to experience a better life after this one is over, and then
HIMSELF be resurrected and move on to such an afterlife, it's very likely that
would change the world in significant ways. If he sent angels to suddenly appear
to each of us individually--or even only one in 10, or 100, or 1000, or....--and
the angel grabbed us and slammed us up against a wall, and grabbed our eyes out
blinding us shoving our eyes down our throat, then yelled in our ear that they
were sent from God who DOES EXIST and wants us to go to church every week and
give 10% of our income to the church or the angel will come back, then reaches
up our ass and pulls our eyes back out and replaces them miraculously giving our
sight back, it's very likely that would change the world too.
Free Lunch
2014-08-30 18:04:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@.not.
the atheist has conditioned himself to suppress the knowledge of God within himself as
we read in v.18 and following of Romans chapter one... he's his own worse enemy hating the fact that
God has exposed his inner, secret thoughts making such... public knowledge.
.
They expose their own thoughts making it known that they believe God does
not exist, yet most of them are ashamed of and want to deny that belief even
after they have made it clear that they have it.
Spam.
It's a fact that the majority of atheists I've encountered who clearly
appear to believe God does not exist, are ashamed to admit it. VERY few have not
been ashamed to admit it. By your own response to what I pointed out you make it
clear that you are ashamed of the situation yourself.
The greatest likelihood is that every god ever taught is a complete
fabrication by people who were telling just-so stories to explain things
they were unable to explain because they didn't know enough. Other gods
and god attributes were invented by priests for their own personal
aggrandizement. No evidence supports any claim that any god exists.

I am not ashamed not to believe the indefensible claims made about gods.
m***@.not.
2014-09-03 22:58:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
the atheist has conditioned himself to suppress the knowledge of God within himself as
we read in v.18 and following of Romans chapter one... he's his own worse enemy hating the fact that
God has exposed his inner, secret thoughts making such... public knowledge.
.
They expose their own thoughts making it known that they believe God does
not exist, yet most of them are ashamed of and want to deny that belief even
after they have made it clear that they have it.
Spam.
It's a fact that the majority of atheists I've encountered who clearly
appear to believe God does not exist, are ashamed to admit it. VERY few have not
been ashamed to admit it. By your own response to what I pointed out you make it
clear that you are ashamed of the situation yourself.
The greatest likelihood is that every god ever taught is a complete
fabrication by people who were telling just-so stories to explain things
they were unable to explain because they didn't know enough. Other gods
and god attributes were invented by priests for their own personal
aggrandizement.
If God does exist I have no doubt that everyone has some incorrect
interpretations about him. None more so than atheists of course, but I feel sure
everybody has some to varying degrees.
Post by Free Lunch
No evidence supports any claim that any god exists.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
Post by Free Lunch
I am not ashamed not to believe the indefensible claims made about gods.
You've made it clear that you believe God does not exist:

"It is clear that there is no need for an intelligent being." - Free Lunch

"all gods are human inventions" - Free Lunch

"The gods of the theists who bother us here don't exist, even in non-god form."
- Free Lunch
Free Lunch
2014-09-03 23:28:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
the atheist has conditioned himself to suppress the knowledge of God within himself as
we read in v.18 and following of Romans chapter one... he's his own worse enemy hating the fact that
God has exposed his inner, secret thoughts making such... public knowledge.
.
They expose their own thoughts making it known that they believe God does
not exist, yet most of them are ashamed of and want to deny that belief even
after they have made it clear that they have it.
Spam.
It's a fact that the majority of atheists I've encountered who clearly
appear to believe God does not exist, are ashamed to admit it. VERY few have not
been ashamed to admit it. By your own response to what I pointed out you make it
clear that you are ashamed of the situation yourself.
The greatest likelihood is that every god ever taught is a complete
fabrication by people who were telling just-so stories to explain things
they were unable to explain because they didn't know enough. Other gods
and god attributes were invented by priests for their own personal
aggrandizement.
If God does exist I have no doubt that everyone has some incorrect
interpretations about him. None more so than atheists of course, but I feel sure
everybody has some to varying degrees.
I have no need to worry about any gods.
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
No evidence supports any claim that any god exists.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
I don't think there is any specific evidence that should apply to any
gods, but if you tell me what your religion teaches then your religion
is telling you what evidence should exist. Any religion that makes
claims about a god implies obvious evidence that should exist to show
that the religious claims are valid. Any religion that makes excuses for
why that evidence does not exist is totally untrustworthy.
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
I am not ashamed not to believe the indefensible claims made about gods.
"It is clear that there is no need for an intelligent being." - Free Lunch
"all gods are human inventions" - Free Lunch
"The gods of the theists who bother us here don't exist, even in non-god form."
- Free Lunch
I have made it clear that I do not believe in any gods that any
religions teach because no religion is able to back up its claims.
m***@.not.
2014-09-05 18:44:24 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 03 Sep 2014 18:28:34 -0500, Free Lunch <***@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
the atheist has conditioned himself to suppress the knowledge of God within himself as
we read in v.18 and following of Romans chapter one... he's his own worse enemy hating the fact that
God has exposed his inner, secret thoughts making such... public knowledge.
.
They expose their own thoughts making it known that they believe God does
not exist, yet most of them are ashamed of and want to deny that belief even
after they have made it clear that they have it.
Spam.
It's a fact that the majority of atheists I've encountered who clearly
appear to believe God does not exist, are ashamed to admit it. VERY few have not
been ashamed to admit it. By your own response to what I pointed out you make it
clear that you are ashamed of the situation yourself.
The greatest likelihood is that every god ever taught is a complete
fabrication by people who were telling just-so stories to explain things
they were unable to explain because they didn't know enough. Other gods
and god attributes were invented by priests for their own personal
aggrandizement.
If God does exist I have no doubt that everyone has some incorrect
interpretations about him. None more so than atheists of course, but I feel sure
everybody has some to varying degrees.
I have no need to worry about any gods.
What I pointed out remains true regardless of how much you do or don't
"worry about any gods."
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
No evidence supports any claim that any god exists.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
I don't think there is any specific evidence that should apply to any
gods,
None of you have ever had any idea what you were demanding when you demand
evidence of God's existence, yet few of you are willing to admit it.
Post by Free Lunch
but if you tell me what your religion teaches then your religion
is telling you what evidence should exist.
Luke 4:12
Jesus answered, "It is said: Β‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.'"
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+4&version=NIV
Post by Free Lunch
Any religion that makes
claims about a god implies obvious evidence that should exist to show
that the religious claims are valid. Any religion that makes excuses for
why that evidence does not exist is totally untrustworthy.
Show me some. Here's something I find obvious and easy to comprehend and
appreciate, but you atheists can't comprehend at all: If God provided everyone
with proof of his existence we would be like slaves instead of having the
freedom of thought that we do have.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
I am not ashamed not to believe the indefensible claims made about gods.
"It is clear that there is no need for an intelligent being." - Free Lunch
"all gods are human inventions" - Free Lunch
"The gods of the theists who bother us here don't exist, even in non-god form."
- Free Lunch
I have made it clear that I do not believe in any gods that any
religions teach because no religion is able to back up its claims.
I feel that all religions have incorrect beliefs associated with them but
unlike yourself that doesn't cause me to have faith that there is no God
associated with this planet, nor does anything else.
Free Lunch
2014-09-05 19:34:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
the atheist has conditioned himself to suppress the knowledge of God within himself as
we read in v.18 and following of Romans chapter one... he's his own worse enemy hating the fact that
God has exposed his inner, secret thoughts making such... public knowledge.
.
They expose their own thoughts making it known that they believe God does
not exist, yet most of them are ashamed of and want to deny that belief even
after they have made it clear that they have it.
Spam.
It's a fact that the majority of atheists I've encountered who clearly
appear to believe God does not exist, are ashamed to admit it. VERY few have not
been ashamed to admit it. By your own response to what I pointed out you make it
clear that you are ashamed of the situation yourself.
The greatest likelihood is that every god ever taught is a complete
fabrication by people who were telling just-so stories to explain things
they were unable to explain because they didn't know enough. Other gods
and god attributes were invented by priests for their own personal
aggrandizement.
If God does exist I have no doubt that everyone has some incorrect
interpretations about him. None more so than atheists of course, but I feel sure
everybody has some to varying degrees.
I have no need to worry about any gods.
What I pointed out remains true regardless of how much you do or don't
"worry about any gods."
There is no evidence that your god exists. Why should I listen to your
propaganda?
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
No evidence supports any claim that any god exists.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
I don't think there is any specific evidence that should apply to any
gods,
None of you have ever had any idea what you were demanding when you demand
evidence of God's existence, yet few of you are willing to admit it.
That is not an answer. It appears to be an excuse on your part for your
inability to answer.
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
but if you tell me what your religion teaches then your religion
is telling you what evidence should exist.
Luke 4:12
Jesus answered, "It is said: Β‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.'"
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+4&version=NIV
I have no reason to trust the claims made in the Bible. Don't waste
everyone's time quoting a book that is untrustworthy and full of
falsehoods.
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Any religion that makes
claims about a god implies obvious evidence that should exist to show
that the religious claims are valid. Any religion that makes excuses for
why that evidence does not exist is totally untrustworthy.
Show me some. Here's something I find obvious and easy to comprehend and
appreciate, but you atheists can't comprehend at all: If God provided everyone
with proof of his existence we would be like slaves instead of having the
freedom of thought that we do have.
If a god cared about whether people believed in it, why would he hide?
The threat of hell is clearly a human invention made by believers who
hate that there are those who have not been conned into believing their
indefensible religious doctrines.
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
I am not ashamed not to believe the indefensible claims made about gods.
"It is clear that there is no need for an intelligent being." - Free Lunch
"all gods are human inventions" - Free Lunch
"The gods of the theists who bother us here don't exist, even in non-god form."
- Free Lunch
I have made it clear that I do not believe in any gods that any
religions teach because no religion is able to back up its claims.
I feel that all religions have incorrect beliefs associated with them but
unlike yourself that doesn't cause me to have faith that there is no God
associated with this planet, nor does anything else.
It doesn't matter to me if there are any gods. It does matter to me that
religions are human inventions used to hurt other humans.
--
Suppose weΒ’ve chosen the wrong god. Every time we go to church weΒ’re
just making him madder and madder! - Homer Simpson
m***@.not.
2014-09-10 18:47:12 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 05 Sep 2014 14:34:47 -0500, Free Lunch <***@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
the atheist has conditioned himself to suppress the knowledge of God within himself as
we read in v.18 and following of Romans chapter one... he's his own worse enemy hating the fact that
God has exposed his inner, secret thoughts making such... public knowledge.
.
They expose their own thoughts making it known that they believe God does
not exist, yet most of them are ashamed of and want to deny that belief even
after they have made it clear that they have it.
Spam.
It's a fact that the majority of atheists I've encountered who clearly
appear to believe God does not exist, are ashamed to admit it. VERY few have not
been ashamed to admit it. By your own response to what I pointed out you make it
clear that you are ashamed of the situation yourself.
The greatest likelihood is that every god ever taught is a complete
fabrication by people who were telling just-so stories to explain things
they were unable to explain because they didn't know enough. Other gods
and god attributes were invented by priests for their own personal
aggrandizement.
If God does exist I have no doubt that everyone has some incorrect
interpretations about him. None more so than atheists of course, but I feel sure
everybody has some to varying degrees.
I have no need to worry about any gods.
What I pointed out remains true regardless of how much you do or don't
"worry about any gods."
There is no evidence that your god exists. Why should I listen to your
propaganda?
Like what? Provide quotes.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
No evidence supports any claim that any god exists.
Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you
think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for him
to provide us with it if he exists.
I don't think there is any specific evidence that should apply to any
gods,
None of you have ever had any idea what you were demanding when you demand
evidence of God's existence, yet few of you are willing to admit it.
That is not an answer.
It's a significant fact, even though you wish it were not.
Post by Free Lunch
It appears to be an excuse on your part for your
inability to answer.
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
but if you tell me what your religion teaches then your religion
is telling you what evidence should exist.
Luke 4:12
Jesus answered, "It is said: Β‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.'"
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+4&version=NIV
I have no reason to trust the claims made in the Bible.
So you disbelieve what Jesus said was said, was said?
Post by Free Lunch
Don't waste
everyone's time quoting a book that is untrustworthy and full of
falsehoods.
Post by m***@.not.
Post by Free Lunch
Any religion that makes
claims about a god implies obvious evidence that should exist to show
that the religious claims are valid. Any religion that makes excuses for
why that evidence does not exist is totally untrustworthy.
Show me some. Here's something I find obvious and easy to comprehend and
appreciate, but you atheists can't comprehend at all: If God provided everyone
with proof of his existence we would be like slaves instead of having the
freedom of thought that we do have.
If a god cared about whether people believed in it, why would he hide?
Why would he need to hide? For a specific example, try to explain how you
want people to think God is hiding from you in particular.
Loading...