Oh dornpiet that wasn't aimed at you but at HiddenDistance.
ah alright just saw the thread. as said before i have no problems with misspelling. actually i think it would be pretty cool if we would all stick to arguments and not try to win debates by sticking out misspellings, grammar mistakes and similar things. i mean not everyone has english as his mothertongue here.
too (not being a Nazi but correct grammar and spelling=respect) and your welcome
yeah maybe not everyone here is using english in his everyday life, but wants to contribute to this community. so discreditation of arguments or persons just because of grammar or spelling seems to be ignorant and an easy way out of a debate
The difference here is you interpret everything you here with the mindset the God doesn't exist and I interpret everything with the mindset God does exist. It's all based on pre established ideas.
No. I would be terribly closed minded if I was 100% sure of my own opinion. If I want to think of myself as a reasonable person, I have to have a point at to which I will concede, and believe in a god - but it will certainly take some extraordinary proof. Otherwise, I'm not being scientific. I accept the possibility, but the probability isn't there.
Nope but logic science and reason are all things created by fallible humans. Logic science and reason are great but God defies all logic reason and science. Imagine if you would that were two dimensional creatures we understand left and right and front and back, but if someone told us the there's something called up and down we'd laugh at the idea. Just because something exceeds human mental capacities doesn't mean it's not true.
This argument works against you as well though - since you have no concept of these beings, and neither did any of those prophets or the men who wrote the bible, it's hardly realistic to accept it, or even have faith in it.
What do u mean your point HiddenDistance??? Earlier u were saying that humans came from nothing.
Well u weren't exactly saying humans came from nothing
If you can quote me saying humans came from nothing, feel free to do so. You asked where humans came from after the time of dinosaurs, the answer was evolution. You're asking questions about abiogenesis - I'm not certain; however, even if I have no idea, it doesn't make god a better answer. If I hear a noise in my room and I'm not sure what it is, should I blame ghosts? Or aliens? Or god? Or is it more likely a branch scraping at the window, or the wind? The habit of the religious is to grasp at the more unlikely explanations first, and ignore everything else. Just because science doesn't have an answer yet, does not mean 'god' is the correct answer - because again, there's no proof of a god.
Oh and I misspell a few words now and then I beg of your forgiveness (rolling eyes). Also I didn't know this was a grammaar session.
If you make so many errors I have no idea what it is you're saying, then you have a serious problem in trying to convey your message. Beyond that, how am I supposed to take you seriously when you can barely demonstrate the most basic competence of language skills?
God not existing is a theorie not a baseline. Well believe it or not theres millions upon millions of people with my same "crack pot theorie"
I don't have to believe it - it's a fact, and I think they're just as crazy as you are for believing it too.
Going from your line of logic for god not existing as a theory - is the tooth fairy not existing a theory? What about the trix rabbit? Or santa claus? Or the easter rabbit? They're all as plausible as god, so I guess we can put them on an equal pedestal next to the almighty, since you can't prove to me they don't exist. That's how embarassing that is as an arugment.
This argument works against you as well though - since you have no concept of these beings, and neither did any of those prophets or the men who wrote the bible, it's hardly realistic to accept it, or even have faith in it.
Every argument for or against religion is a circular one, it's just a fact.
No. I would be terribly closed minded if I was 100% sure of my own opinion. If I want to think of myself as a reasonable person, I have to have a point at to which I will concede, and believe in a god - but it will certainly take some extraordinary proof. Otherwise, I'm not being scientific. I accept the possibility, but the probability isn't there.
See right there extraordinary proof, bias not saying it wouldn't take extraordinary proof to convince me there's no God, but everyone already has a mindset in place when they review facts and ideas.
Going from your line of logic for god not existing as a theory - is the tooth fairy not existing a theory? What about the trix rabbit? Or santa claus? Or the easter rabbit? They're all as plausible as god, so I guess we can put them on an equal pedestal next to the almighty, since you can't prove to me they don't exist. That's how embarassing that is as an arugment.
I'd disagree with that, again we have the bible as proof now whether or not you accept that is up to you but to us it's proof. Santa Clause and the others aren't theories there stories that people made up which is fairly common knowledge.
The habit of the religious is to grasp at the more unlikely explanations first, and ignore everything else. Just because science doesn't have an answer yet, does not mean 'god' is the correct answer - because again, there's no proof of a god.
The habit of atheists is to grasp on to the "logical" explanation first and refuse point blank to believe that there's anything supernatural about it.
Ok unless your a kid or tennager under thirteeen or fourteen your parents will have told you that they were the " santa clause ect... As a fact.
And I'm pretty sure people know what word theorie was supposed to mean or worte. I believe those were my only spelling mistakes except for (ty and u). And I dont think that counts as a "serious problem".
And yes I missunderstood what you wrote about evolution now I understand but evolution is a theory.
And I never said you had to believe it I only merely pointed out the millions upon millions of people believe in God.
is the tooth fairy not existing a theory? What about the trix rabbit? Or santa claus? Or the easter rabbit?
The tooth fairy (apply this concept to Santa and the easter bunny), if going by the concept that they replace the teeth left under the pillow with money, is proven false once your parents reveal that they replace the tooth with money. The trix rabbit is a cartoon, and we know that cartoons are drawings. Therefore, the trix rabbit is not real. With religion, it's a bit different, because while one may question the realiability of the religion, the God here is not going to be revealed as false by hoaxers (even if you believe priests are lying or just wrong), and God is not a cartoon (unless you count Family Guy's God). Anyway, just wanted to throw that out there.
Every argument for or against religion is a circular one, it's just a fact.
You are mistaken. Arguments against religion go on the basis that there is no proof for religion. The burden of proof lies with religion, so without proof, you have no argument. I don't have to *do* anything other then that, and you even said yourself earlier - the initial belief in god is something that is not based on the 5 senses; which you wouldn't have to go outside of if there was proof.
See right there extraordinary proof, bias not saying it wouldn't take extraordinary proof to convince me there's no God, but everyone already has a mindset in place when they review facts and ideas.
You're incorrect again. A favorite quote of Carl Sagan I like to refer to in these instances:
If you tell me I have milk in my fridge, I'd believe you. It's something that's commonly in my fridge, it would be a silly thing to lie about, and it's totally plausible. The fridge is a place to keep milk.
If you tell me that the reaction of two chemicals being mixed is a brilliant bright light - and then you combine the two and show me, it makes sense.
If you tell me that a being lives in a place we can't see, outside of time, and lives forever & created the entire universe and all the planets, stars, and life in it, and has total control over those lives and can listen to every prayer in every person's head in the planet....
I'm going to need more then just a book with a few stories. A lot more. There is nothing else even remotely like that which the human race has ever discovered. There's no precedent for it. You'll need to do better then "there's milk in the fridge", you get me?
I'd disagree with that, again we have the bible as proof now whether or not you accept that is up to you but to us it's proof. Santa Clause and the others aren't theories there stories that people made up which is fairly common knowledge.
But someone wrote those stories, so they *must* be true. Don't you see the problem with the bible for someone who isn't already a confirmed believer?
The habit of atheists is to grasp on to the "logical" explanation first and refuse point blank to believe that there's anything supernatural about it.
Yeah... what a bad idea. Go for something that makes sense and not go straight to the ideas that fixate on ghosts, vampires, werewolves, ghouls & gods. Without proof, there is no such thing as "supernatural".
Ok unless your a kid or tennager under thirteeen or fourteen your parents will have told you that they were the " santa clause ect... As a fact.
Right. And now I'm telling you that God belongs with that group.
but evolution is a theory.
You don't understand what the word theory means, and how the scientific method works... do you?
God here is not going to be revealed as false by hoaxers (even if you believe priests are lying or just wrong),
Not by the priests themselves - this far down the line they actually believe in this stuff. It is being revealed as false though because of the lack of any logical, factual, and intellectual support for it.
