Prove there's a god.
ROCCO

Indio, CA

#770022 Aug 17, 2014
Joyful8118 wrote:
<quoted text>
No rumor about it, you'll never get the pleasure.
Thank you for that extra layer of security, Joyless.

One should always have extra protection.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#770023 Aug 17, 2014
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
No, it wouldn't. If it cannot exist, it does not exist.
<quoted text>
No. What does that have to do with anything?
<quoted text>
I'm not a taco.
There is no me that is a taco in existence.
Why is this so hard for you?
If you define John as a married bachelor, "John", the thing you just defined as a married bachelor, cannot exist. People named John may exist. People named John that are married may exist. People named John that are bachelors may exist. No married bachelors exist.
The John being described still exists.

You would still exist if described as a taco.

This argument you are making reflects a second-grader's level of logic and reason.

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's teapot

#770024 Aug 17, 2014
Stilgar Fifrawi wrote:
Stilgar Fifrawi wrote:
Explain why theism is a belief but atheism isn't.
<quoted text>
O..........kay.
But why do you think theism is a belief but atheism isn't.
You almost answered; "Theists have a belief".
So do atheists...
No, theists have a belief there is a deity or deities based upon no objective evidence that there is a deity. We reject the evidence you accept since it is entirely subjective.

The atheist doesn't accept that subjective evidence. Why? It isn't convincing. We don't maintain theistic faith in support of a belief that there are deities when there is no objective evidence for the existence of deities.

That doesn't equate to theistic belief. Until there is some sort of objective evidence for the existence of a deity or deities, I'm not going to believe there are based upon subjective evidence as the theist does.

It's pretty simple, really.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#770025 Aug 17, 2014
Susie D wrote:
A true atheist just does not care and they do not argue about it.
We'll define ourselves, thank you very much. Would you like to empower me to define for you what a true Christian is?
Susie D wrote:
These so called atheist are just angry at God
Once again, you are not qualified to tell us what we believe.
Susie D wrote:
I am here to tell you and ALL the atheist who post her, you cannot be angry at something that is not real.
You just said the opposite. Furthermore, you were wrong. We are not angry at Jehovah. Not Quetzalcoatl, nor Zeus, nor Santa.

Since: Jan 11

United States

#770026 Aug 17, 2014
Stilgar Fifrawi wrote:
Or the so-called atheist professor in the movie. The one who claims God isn't real, even though he's pissed off at God due to his mom's death; "A loving God wouldn't do that".
One who claims that God isn't real, a god defined as a loving god, could point to anything that a loving god wouldn't do as an argument that the god doesn't exist.

______ deforms thought.

Anybody know what it is?
ROCCO

Indio, CA

#770027 Aug 17, 2014
Joyful8118 wrote:
<quoted text>
Still lying. I only posted two links in this post. Try again, liar. If they aren't there, it is because you all already had them deleted. They were posted, evil demon.
repeat:

Paranoia is a thought process believed to be heavily influenced by anxiety or fear, often[1] to the point of irrationality and delusion. Paranoid thinking typically includes persecutory beliefs, or beliefs of conspiracy concerning a perceived threat towards oneself (e.g. "Everyone is out to get me"). Paranoia is distinct from phobias, which also involve irrational fear, but usually no blame. Making false accusations and the general distrust of others also frequently accompany paranoia. For example, an incident most people would view as an accident or coincidence, a paranoid person might believe was intentional.

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's teapot

#770028 Aug 17, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
No, Juice, I hadn't heard.
Not that you wouldn't be a catch. You are smart, funny, kind, and just. If you have any character flaws, they don't manifest on Topix.
But you are correct. I am happily married and don't stray or even flirt. I know that's what Mrs. Aint wants, and I am happy to give it to her..
And thanks for the kind words.
I approve of this post.
ROCCO

Indio, CA

#770029 Aug 17, 2014
Joyful8118 wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sure the originals will be deleted by the time you read this, but I know the truth. They lie and change people's posts when they reply then report the original posts to get them deleted so there is no proof. I know this to be fact.
Link to my original post:
http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/TOCO8TE...
Link to IANS reply to my original post:
http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/TOCO8TE...
In the last line he changed what I said to I babysit now, proving that he is exactly what I said he is. Watch my original post will disappear.
Oh! And now, it's FACT!

Paranoia is a thought process believed to be heavily influenced by anxiety or fear, often[1] to the point of irrationality and delusion. Paranoid thinking typically includes persecutory beliefs, or beliefs of conspiracy concerning a perceived threat towards oneself (e.g. "Everyone is out to get me"). Paranoia is distinct from phobias, which also involve irrational fear, but usually no blame. Making false accusations and the general distrust of others also frequently accompany paranoia. For example, an incident most people would view as an accident or coincidence, a paranoid person might believe was intentional.

Maybe I should switch to "delusion".

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#770030 Aug 17, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course. I have no choice, and no real interest in changing it. Why would I get frustrated over something that is out of my control and is irrelevant to me?
<quoted text>
I won't use the term myself that way, but I will understand what somebody who does means when he does if he defines his terms in advance.
It is not irrelevant to you. You offer your assessment of the rationality of Christians frequently.

You are saying you would not protest Christians, in communication among themselves and others, and with you, defining themselves as including all rational human beings.

You would not resist the idea that if you are rational, you have to be a Christian.

I see.

That is at odds with practically every post you have ever written on the subject.

But if you say so...

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#770031 Aug 17, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
[1] An omniscient being that grants free will
[2] An omnipotent being incapable of being in the presence of sin
[3] A perfect being needing worship
[4] A perfect being that changes its mind
[5] A perfect being that makes mistakes or contradicts itself
[6] A perfect being that creates or alters anything
[7] A non-spacial being being omnipresent
[8] An onmibenevolent being that permits evil and allows suffering
[9] A perfectly just being that punishes innocents like offspring.
[10] A merciful being that damns without hope of forgiveness from hell.
[11] Anything existing, persisting, thinking or acting outside of time. Those verbs, like all verbs, imply an interval of time.
[12] An omnipresent being that we can be separated from.
[13] An omnisicient being that tests people
[14] An omnipotent being that wants anything
[15] An omnibenevolent being that exhibits wrath and tortures souls
[16] An omnibenevolent being that unleashes a master demon on earth
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Not a logical contradiction
2. Not a logical contradiction - not being in the presence of sin could be a rule self-imposed.
3. Not a logical contradiction - worship is not defined as a need of God.
4. Not a logical contradiction
5. Not a logical contradiction - "mistake" is your characterization.
6. Nonsensical premise
7. Not a logical contradiction - implying physical space, which is your characterization.
8. Not a logical contradiction - imposing your understanding of 'benevolence' on a deity.
9. Not a logical contrdiction - you don't know who is innocent.
10 You are right on this one.
11 Not a logical contradiction - your premise is false - verb tense does not impose itself on any existential question.
12. Redundant
13. Not a logical contradiction - an omniscient being can test anything it wants.
14. Not a logical contradiction - an omniscient being can want whatever it wants.
15. You are right on this one.
16. I'll give you this one, too.
3 for 16.
Did you allow that all those terms have meanings that can evolve?
Given that, none of them are logical contradictions.
We don't need to quibble over the score if we agree that there is even one logical contradiction. One logical impossibility means that the creature described is impossible, and therefore doesn't exist.

It also means that the source of the contradiction cannot be a perfect god. Perfect gods don't make mistakes, and gods that make mistakes are imperfect. Nothing is both perfect and imperfect just as nobody is both married and a bachelor. It's basic logic - the law of noncontradiction.

Agreed?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#770032 Aug 17, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course. I have no choice, and no real interest in changing it. Why would I get frustrated over something that is out of my control and is irrelevant to me?
<quoted text>
I won't use the term myself that way, but I will understand what somebody who does means when he does if he defines his terms in advance.
I would protest forcefully.

Because it would be dishonest and wrong.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#770033 Aug 17, 2014
Huh wrote:
Fractally wrong and ignorant is no way to go through life, Suzie Q.
A classic.

Since: Dec 12

Yes, I'm an Atheist.

#770034 Aug 17, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text> http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/TOCO8TE...

Thanks, Juice

"The foundation of morality is to … give up pretending to believe that for which there is no evidence, and repeating unintelligible propositions about things beyond the possibilities of knowledge".– Thomas Huxley
No worries.

Nice quote, I'll add it to my collection, cheers.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#770035 Aug 17, 2014
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>
Theists have a belief there is a deity or deities, of which there are many, and none of those deities are supported by evidence that can be objectively evaluated, which, if it could be, would convince all theists and non theists alike that a specific deity or deities do indeed exist.
When I mention evidence that can be objectively evaluated, I'm talking about the same type of evidence that would suffice when looking at a tree or water and determining that it is a tree or water, or something as simple as words on a page in a book, and being able to determine that is indeed what is being spoken of and represented by that evidence.
Deities don't have that type of evidence.
Any evidence that is alleged to support the existence of a deity or deities is entirely subjective, and subjectively, can be rejected or accepted as evidence, due to whatever reason a person deems appropriate.
Not one sentence in your post is correct.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#770036 Aug 17, 2014
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>

I'm very optimistic about the future of humanity if we can get over this hurdle of superstitious thinking.
You mean about black holes and an infinite universe?

Since: Jan 11

United States

#770037 Aug 17, 2014
River Tam wrote:
Attempting to drink a bear is never a good idea.
I'll have a polar bear on ice.

Whattaya mean you ran out?
ROCCO

Indio, CA

#770038 Aug 17, 2014
curiouslu wrote:
<quoted text>
Hahaha.
Keep dancing for me, look at you all fired up. Love it.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#770039 Aug 17, 2014
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>
No, theists have a belief there is a deity or deities based upon no objective evidence that there is a deity. We reject the evidence you accept since it is entirely subjective.
The atheist doesn't accept that subjective evidence. Why? It isn't convincing. We don't maintain theistic faith in support of a belief that there are deities when there is no objective evidence for the existence of deities.
That doesn't equate to theistic belief. Until there is some sort of objective evidence for the existence of a deity or deities, I'm not going to believe there are based upon subjective evidence as the theist does.
It's pretty simple, really.
It isn't about accepting evidence or emotions or opinions or age groups or nationalities. It's about the two simple words. You're halfway there. I'll finish it for you.

"theists have a belief there is a deity." DING! DING! DING!

Add...

"atheists have a belief there is no deity."

The "why" doesn't matter.

Since: Jan 11

United States

#770040 Aug 17, 2014
Stilgar Fifrawi wrote:
Not really. Other people delusions, like IANS
claiming Christianity teaches homophobia, isn't the real big concern.
You're out of touch.

http://www.alternet.org/story/155462/how_the_... 's_homophobia_scares_away_reli gious_young_people

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#770041 Aug 17, 2014
Tide with Beach wrote:
One who claims that God isn't real, a god defined as a loving god, could point to anything that a loving god wouldn't do as an argument that the god doesn't exist.
______ deforms thought.
Anybody know what it is?
Tater tots.

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
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 2 min Lifelover 617,992
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 4 min Never-ending Doctor 30,305
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 18 min Hillary 2016 181,967
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 19 min New Age Spiritual... 638,113
*** All Time Favorite Songs *** (Dec '10) 23 min Classic 3,559
ye olde village pub (Jun '07) 1 hr okimar 53,718
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 1 hr RiccardoFire 43,941
American Soldiers - Duty, Honor, Country (Jun '11) 7 hr Naturally Wired 38,054
More from around the web