Prove there's a god.

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#767300 Aug 10, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Bad answer demonstrating poor judgment. All you had to do was repost the link or its content. Instead, you called me a liar. And you are mistaken. I didn't see them. When have I ever run from any question?
Now the matter is closed. Please feel free to stick it up your ass.
I posted it three times.

So far as I can tell, you've ignored it twice.

I'm still catching up, let's see if you ignore the third one.

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#767301 Aug 10, 2014
scaritual wrote:

I didn't use that word [atheophobia], and don't.
Are you having another word jumble?
Whether or not you use the word is irrelevant, the word is used.

“Spelin 'n' tpyin...”

Since: Feb 08

...are my strong suits!

#767302 Aug 10, 2014
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>You like beef? I suppose you've never seen the video of Mexican farm workers clubbing calves to death with sledge hammers? Do not count on the "meat" you prefer actually being killed humanely.
Apparently a bullet to the head is not cost effective to some butchers.
Wow!

The effects ffj's posts are lasting a little longer than expected.

If I'm hungry enough, sure, I'll choke some down.

I don't consume meat of any kind very often... and if it can be avoided, never from a grocery store.

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#767303 Aug 10, 2014
Bigger Baby Jeebus wrote:
<quoted text>This is the last refuge of a charlatan, daring me to wade over 34 thousand posts in over four years and proclaiming victory. You are definitely a pigeon chess pundit.
You claimed to have witnessed it. So it should not be hard to find again.

But we both know you're lying.

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#767304 Aug 10, 2014
Stilgar Fifrawi wrote:
I don't believe you.
It aint necessarily so wrote:
All you had to do was repost the link or its content. Instead, you called me a liar.
Woah woah, grasshoppa. I didn't say you were lying, I said I don't believe you.

Big difference.

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#767305 Aug 10, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
And no food in Ethiopia. Ethiopia had first dibs.
There's no food in Ethiopia but Ethiopia has a population of 92 million.

More atheist logic?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#767306 Aug 10, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
Is your god conscious? Try defining consciousness ... without time ... You seem to be saying that in the case of a god, existence, consciousness, thought and action don't require time. That nonsensical special pleading to me, like telling me that for a god, liquid water can be dry. Time is as inextricably linked to consciousness as wetness is to water. Consciousness requires the experience of "was," "is," and "will be" An insect seeing a lizard approaching and scurrying away has an implicit, nonlinguistic sense of "it was further," "it is closer," and "it will be close enough to harm me" even without having such thoughts explicitly. The lizard also has an intuition of "I was further," "I am nearing," and "I will pounce and eat." ... That would apply to all consciousness, even a god. Even if we strip away the extension and otherness, and even the sense of self so that we are left with nothing but awareness, the clock is ticking. But you need your god to exist outside of time so that it could create it. You also need for your god to not have a first moment, and you reject the notion of an infinite past. So, with the wave of a hand, you declare that it has conscious existence outside of time. Easy to say, like dry water. And with faith, you can learn to ignore the contradictions, often accompanied by some notion like it transcends the comprehension of the human mind. But that's not the kind of thinking I want to do. That seems like a sure way to come to false conclusions or to believe what I'd call nonsense. Think about that word for a moment: nonsense is that which is not sensible, like a married bachelor, dry liquid water, and consciousness without time.
Buck Crick wrote:
I use "existed" as a conscious observer of time, in time. Creation occurred in our conscious past. This says nothing about applying tense to events absent time. Absence of time is a requirement for the creation of time. All verbs imply a past, present, or future, or a path through time because we are conscious observers in time describing what we are conscious of. Time determines the applicability of these verbs; the verbs do not determine anything about time or its absence, and in the absence of the conscious observer. Therefore, to say nothing exists absent time is illogical.
It aint necessarily so wrote:
I think that it is logically inconsistent. Creation is an action with a prior and later state - something first wasn't, then it was. That requires time. If may make sense to say that our universe had a first moment, but from whatever domain this god resides, there had to be a before and after in that reference frame for an act of created to have occurred ... phrases like "before time" or "exiting outside of time" are just as invalid ... Something that never moved or changed in any way would still trace an arc through time, passing from instant to instant. You can't be forced to acknowledge this, but if you don't, how can we proceed?
Buck Crick wrote:
You are wrong. The logic you are trying to impose is one where linguistics determines existential events. It can be stated, "if a verb form is used, time is necessitated". That violates logic. Not only is "before" and "after" a linguistic device not imposed on a creator of time, they are features of the subjective observer of time, and would be logically impossible absent time.
I continue to believe that consciousness requires a sense of was, is and will be, and that conscious experience is a series of states unfolding over what is experienced as time for any conscious experience to occur. You have disagreed, but you haven't said anything meaningful to me in rebuttal. You simply seem to be using a lot of words without clear meanings to say that you prefer to think that your conscious god can exist outside of time.

I think we've exhausted this topic. Thanks for your interest and good cheer.

“Spelin 'n' tpyin...”

Since: Feb 08

...are my strong suits!

#767307 Aug 10, 2014
nanoanomaly wrote:
Oh, crap, make that "so does science".
For once, my fingers got ahead of my thoughts.
Not that dust science isn't cool and very scary.
Told ya.

Temporary.

“LOL Really?”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#767308 Aug 10, 2014
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text> Sure, serpent grabber.
http://i1246.photobucket.com/albums/gg601/sca...
Some serpents can talk their way out of trouble.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#767309 Aug 10, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
It's not that you said every Christian is homophobic (whatever the hell that means) To say that "Christianity" is homophobic, when christianity is practiced by many churches, congregations and communities in a way that is hospitable to gays is not a matter of semantics. It's a matter of inaccuracy.
I'm not up for wordplay. Homophobia in America, like atheophobia, is very real, and is the work of the Christian church. That is gays are unjustly stigmatized, and that is due mostly or entirely to the church.

Christians that are not homophobic don't matter, because they are either silent or are drowned out by those that are. They do not mitigate the effect of the homophobes.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#767312 Aug 10, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
You forgot to tell him about the black holes.
Buck Crick wrote:
Where did homophobia come from? Well, it came from thr word factory liberals have out in Berkeley. They pour letters into a hopper, the letters get tumbled and mixed, then combinations get puked out the other end of the machine. This is also the source of phrases like "right to choose" and "climate science".
Is this really the quality of material you want to be posting?

“LOL Really?”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#767313 Aug 10, 2014
Stilgar Fifrawi wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure. Sure.
And Star Wars was based on reality because it had humans in it.....
The "Noah" movie wasn't based on reality.

It was a film about a fictional story, yes? You don't really think there was global flood, do you?

Also, Russell Crowe wasn't a gladiator.

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#767314 Aug 10, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:

Christians that are not homophobic don't matter, because they are either silent or are drowned out by those that are.
Says who?

And why would you say we don't matter?

Many Christians are a positive voice in the fight against homophobia. Don't sit there and pretend that the 4% of atheists in this country are doing all the good. Please, don't do that.

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#767315 Aug 10, 2014
Stilgar Fifrawi wrote:
<quoted text>
Right. But if they're going to make a movie based on the story from a book, don't you think the story from the book should be followed?





I bet the Babylonians said something similar when the Jews used the Epic of Gilgamesh as the basis for their Noah story

“Spelin 'n' tpyin...”

Since: Feb 08

...are my strong suits!

#767316 Aug 10, 2014
ROCCO wrote:
<quoted text>
That's so poignant, Hukt. I'm so sorry for your loss.
Thanks, Rocco.

Posted a few pix to the Topix Thomasville, NC photo album, or whatever it's called.

They're still pending approval. Should be up sometime tomorrow.

If anyone's interested, the can see why Banjo was his name-O.

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#767317 Aug 10, 2014
Stilgar Fifrawi wrote:
<quoted text>
No. The Noah movie was not "pretty much" based on the Bible.
If you actually think that, all you're doing is showing your Biblical ignorance.
LOL We know you hate anything that isn't up to your interpretation of a fictional story.

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#767318 Aug 10, 2014
River Tam wrote:

The "Noah" movie wasn't based on reality.
It was a film about a fictional story, yes? You don't really think there was global flood, do you?
Also, Russell Crowe wasn't a gladiator.
Whether or not it's a fictional story is another argument.

The writers, director and producer did not follow the story of the movie's title. They added all sorts of things in, changed major details and created an entirely new story.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#767319 Aug 10, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
Which improved your life more - the discovery of black holes or the discovery of their non-existence?
Black hole cosmology is good science progressing as science does and should. New discoveries from the telescopes and new insights on the chalk boards are welcome, and certainly don't support any god hypothesis.
Buck Crick wrote:
For myself, the latter improved my life more, because it gave me one more thing with which to ridicule materialists who think only science can uncover "truth".
Feel free. We remain materialists. When faith based thinking makes a contribution to anything, then it can challenge materialism.
Buck Crick wrote:
"Reality and truth" is not determined by whether it "generates useful knowledge". That would make truth entirely subjective.
Truth claims about reality are tested by their ability to predict and at times control reality. Whatever can do that is both correct and useful knowledge
Buck Crick wrote:
Now, for Hawking to disallow black holes, the knowledge for Topix atheists is entirely useless, because they believe in it through faith. So, we have the same particle of knowledge - useful to one, useless to another.
Great argument.

I'll still take rational skepticism, materialism, empiricism, and humanism. Faith is sterile and pollutes thought.

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#767320 Aug 10, 2014
scaritual wrote:
I bet the Babylonians said something similar when the Jews used the Epic of Gilgamesh as the basis for their Noah story
I'll take that bet, but I have two questions:

What are we wagering?
Who's going to ask the Babylonians?

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#767321 Aug 10, 2014
Aura Mytha wrote:

LOL We know you hate anything that isn't up to your interpretation of a fictional story.
I give you 10 clear things that were wrong with the movie, then I posted a link giving you the actual story from Genesis.

I also asked you to compare the two.

Did you bother or do you just want to sit here and call names?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
*** All Time Favorite Songs *** (Dec '10) 20 min --IslandGurL-- 4,370
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 1 hr Holy Chosen Child 690,647
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 1 hr Ice Man 42,605
Poll What's the most exotic/hottest mixed race group? (Jan '13) 3 hr His Eminency dr S... 26
Am I Starting To Like My Step-Cousin? 4 hr what I do 2
American Soldiers - Duty, Honor, Country (Jun '11) 4 hr Prophet Meowmed 39,278
Did you know there are wolves in West Virginia (Mar '11) 6 hr Paul McCartney is... 47
More from around the web