Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The question of whether or not a deity exists can never be answered by science because science has absolutely no access to the realm of supernatural beings. There is no test a scientist can make that would prove anything either way.
- It is impossible to prove that a something does not exist. A lack of evidence is insufficient for this purpose.
- No evidence has ever been found either way.
- Note that God specifically revealed in Scripture that no evidence is provided because he wants belief to be based on faith, not on sight. While this is not evidence, it explains the lack of evidence.
- People have the right to believe any religious belief they want to believe in - even Political Correctness.
- For First Amendment purposes, all beliefs are treated equally - even Atheism.
- Nobody has the right to discriminate against any belief - even Atheism.
- Nobody has the right to force anyone to do something that is prohibited by any belief.
- You do not have the right to attack anyone who believes differently than you believe.
- Stop trying to prove that you are right. You will never succeed without using tenets of your own belief.
- Accept that you can't have a world without religion and you can't have a world that is all one religion.
Show your evidence that I believe there is no God or that I have said that science proves there is No God. Please show specific posts of mine stating those stances. You actually think it is plausible that I have claimed there cannot be a God.
No, you are just like MysticPhD in that it doesn't matter what my words actually are Y9u twist them and use them in a context other than they were used.
FOR THE THIRD TIME, I HAVE NOT BEEN SPEAKING OR MAKING AN OPINION ABOUT HIS IDEA. Plausible or not is pet theory has had no place in my posts you were responding to.
And just what is my type of atheism? I say I don't believe in any Gods because I don't see the evidence being sufficient to have such a belief. How is that being deceitful? In effect, you are calling me a liar without the decency to even tell me what my lie is.
If you are simply posting to me in order to attack others, that is dishonest of yourself.
What is my type of atheism?
How am I deceitful?
Explain both those points or stop addressing me.
Any explanations are seen by you as twisting your words but they are interpreting the logical consequence of your words. You ask for EXPLICIT claims and we are using IMPLICIT claims drawn by inference from your expressed words. If scientific evidence is ALL the evidence that exists as scientific fact, AND if scientific facts are the only way to prove something exists, how can your statement that there is no evidence of the existence of God NOT be interpreted to mean that you are essentially claiming that "there is no God by scientific fact or that science proves there is No God?"
Any explanations are seen by you as twisting your words but they are interpreting the logical consequence of your words. You ask for EXPLICIT claims and we are using IMPLICIT claims drawn by inference from your expressed words. If scientific evidence is ALL the evidence that exists as scientific fact, AND if scientific facts are the only way to prove something exists, how can your statement that there is no evidence of the existence of God NOT be interpreted to mean that you are essentially claiming that "there is no God by scientific fact or that science proves there is No God?"
By taking what he says (and I say) as the words (and meaning) as it reads and not as you try to push into his mouth. Your case relies on forcing a denial of a god on us rather than accepting that the atheist position on the god -(of any sort) claim is a rejection of the argument that there is a god claim that is believable on the (validated)evidence we have.
Unexplained evidence or data, of course, validates nothing until understood and explained. Why do we have to explain this again and again and again?
Any explanations are seen by you as twisting your words but they are interpreting the logical consequence of your words. You ask for EXPLICIT claims and we are using IMPLICIT claims drawn by inference from your expressed words. If scientific evidence is ALL the evidence that exists as scientific fact, AND if scientific facts are the only way to prove something exists, how can your statement that there is no evidence of the existence of God NOT be interpreted to mean that you are essentially claiming that "there is no God by scientific fact or that science proves there is No God?"
Yes you are right. I am top stupid to realize that insufficient evidence to belief in any Gods means I am saying that there is no evidence for a God or that I am saying there is no God.
I apologize to all on this forum for my mistaken belief that my words do not mean what I thought they said but meant something almost the exact opposite of what I meant.
From now on can you and AA please post on my behalf as you are the only ones who know I mean something other than what I post. Thank you for letting me know what I think. I would never had known without your vast intellect.
By taking what he says (and I say) as the words (and meaning) as it reads and not as you try to push into his mouth. Your case relies on forcing a denial of a god on us rather than accepting that the atheist position on the god -(of any sort) claim is a rejection of the argument that there is a god claim that is believable on the (validated)evidence we have.
Unexplained evidence or data, of course, validates nothing until understood and explained. Why do we have to explain this again and again and again?
Oh, perhaps because it is ILLOGICAL to ignore the obvious consequences of expressed beliefs especially when some of you want to demand your atheism be the default belief.
The Humpty fallacy apparently means not only that their words mean whatever they want them to mean but other people's words mean whatever they say they mean.
Yes you are right. I am top stupid to realize that insufficient evidence to believe in any Gods means I am saying that there is no evidence for a God or that I am saying there is no God.
I apologize to all on this forum for my mistaken belief that my words do not mean what I thought they said but meant something almost the exact opposite of what I meant.
From now on can you and AA please post on my behalf as you are the only ones who know I mean something other than what I post. Thank you for letting me know what I think. I would never had known without your vast intellect.
You are making incorrect inferences from what is said. We have no way to determine whether or not you are stupid. We can surmise that drawing inference and using logic are not your strong suit, however, but that seems to be a common deficiency of devoted atheists.
The Humpty fallacy apparently means not only that their words mean whatever they want them to mean but other people's words mean whatever they say they mean.
Well, as a devoted atheist, perhaps you can explain why atheists insist on such a Humpty fallacy using made-up definitions of atheism.
And when the evidence makes the claim plausible, try and get it stopped, change the meaning, whip out tactics like "ok, just don't slow us down. We have the same goal and are here to help you too."
To bad the only ones that buy it have an ax. Well, thats not true, most atheist understand, when in person, we keep god claims separate from religion disappointments.
Some atheist are tied to a statement of belief about god like some theist are. Luckily, most aren't. Some people rely on muddy waters and resentment more than brute science.
Well, as a devoted atheist, perhaps you can explain why atheists insist on such a Humpty fallacy using made-up definitions of atheism.
Maybe because we understand atheism and you don't, don't want to and won't listen.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
