Atheists: Why aren't you theists?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Laurence_of_PA
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
MerryAtheist said:
*]I am only alive because of some cosmic accident: an opinion based on current cosmological theory as well as astronomical and biological evidence as presented by Hawking, Sagan, Dawkins, Stenger, et al.
Click to expand...
This is a belief, that can be logically refuted; it is not a scientific fact or theory, regardless of whether or not the person expressing them is a famous scientists. To me, the idea that reality is an accident that stems from non-realty, is poor philosophy, a product of a “populor ideal”, not logical truth. The universe cannot be an accident if nothing existed before it; an accident involves “pre existing successions of time and space, including matter”— that is the criteria; an existing reality that has “order and substance”. Thats just common sense, something neither Carl Sagan or Richard darwkins, have; and that is because they are to busy trying to brainwash people in to thinking that there is no God, and that universes can pop out of nothing!.

poor, poor people.

Peace.
 
I_Leatherman said:
For every problem there is a solution;
“What Is Truth?”
Now do I make my ablution?
Click to expand...
The Christ I am not, and Pilate not thee,
Mere unsung mortals, no heroes we.
“Seek, and ye shall find” looks excellent on paper;
But in truth it’s a flimsy, flammable life-saver.
All may be answered in due time, I know not;
But since I am here, let’s give it a shot.

I do not ascribe to theists such improper pride!
Many – yes – but we have it too, it can’t be denied.
Faith can’t be proven, or Faith it is not;
Take it in trust, leave us to our lot.
 
Mirdath said:
I do not ascribe to theists such improper pride!
Many – yes – but we have it too, it can’t be denied.
Faith can’t be proven, or Faith it is not;
Take it in trust, leave us to our lot.
Click to expand...
It is the pride of an athiests that cannot see
that the world cannot be a product of its own belief
Only a transedent super nature makes logical sense
Yet the atheist will deny it for freedom in to moral decent.

The athiests hide their guilt behind logical flaws
But god will eventualy tear down those walls
Because the pleasure they enjoy, is a gift from God
So how arrogant must the athiest be, to take with out giving thanks to love.
 
Eastbound and down
Loaded up and trucking
We gonna do what they say can’t be done
We have a long way to go
A short time to get there…🙂
 
freesoulhope said:
This is a belief, that can be logically refuted; it is not a scientific fact or theory…
Click to expand...
That’s why I said it’s an opinion based on evidence.
To me, the idea that reality is an accident that stems from non-realty, is poor philosophy, a product of a “populor ideal”, not logical truth.
Click to expand...
That’s fine, but I was not referring to “reality” - I was referring to “existence”, and I think the scientific evidence of the randomness of nature and the universe is self-evident. Of course, I expect you would disagree with that statement.
The universe cannot be an accident if nothing existed before it; an accident involves “pre existing successions of time and space, including matter”— that is the criteria; an existing reality that has “order and substance”.
Click to expand...
So you say.
It’s a source of great amusement to me that these discussions always devolve down to the “First Cause” argument or some variation thereof. The bottomline for me is that no one knows what existed prior to the universe, if anything. To attempt to solve one unknown (what existed prior to the universe?) by introducing another unknown (god) is fallacious reasoning. The further attempt to use such fallacious reasoning to “prove” the existence of the second unknown (god) is circular reasoning, and simply pointless.
Thats just common sense, something neither Carl Sagan or Richard darwkins, have; and that is because they are to busy trying to brainwash people in to thinking that there is no God, and that universes can pop out of nothing!.
Click to expand...
I take it, therefore, that you have not read any of these sources? Oh, and by the way, Sagan isn’t trying to do much of anything these days…
poor, poor people.
Click to expand...
Patronizing arrogance. That’s always a nice touch.
 
freesoulhope said:
It is the pride of an athiests that cannot see
that the world cannot be a product of its own belief
Only a transedent super nature makes logical sense
Yet the atheist will deny it for freedom in to moral decent.
Click to expand...
To see the unseeable – impossibility!
It is that that’s the issue, no iniquity;
In matters of morals, I cannot agree
With rules from an unknown God’s decree.

So rather than act, blindly following
I do as best I can for all, swallowing
My considerable pride in an effort to do what’s best
Not only for myself, but universally, for the rest.
I act in accordance with the Categorical Imperative,
Immanuel Kant’s secular moral directive.

Not only that, but such creatures are we
To involve each other for good and atrocity.
We do things to others, they to us, this for that;
To align these actions for our good is the Social Contract.
The athiests hide their guilt behind logical flaws
But god will eventualy tear down those walls
Because the pleasure they enjoy, is a gift from God
So how arrogant must the athiest be, to take with out giving thanks to love.
Click to expand...
Logical flaws? Atheism? It’s true, most certainly;
But I think you forget, ‘agnostic’ describes me.
I cannot be shaken, for the stance I assume
With respect to God is a negative view.
A positive statement, that God is or is not
Leaves the burden of proof to you; for me? Rot.
 
Hey! It’s a poetry smackdown!

We’ll know it’s getting close to blows when they switch to limericks…
 
Mirdath said:
To see the unseeable – impossibility!
It is that that’s the issue, no iniquity;
Click to expand...
Its simple common sense that God exists
The common sense proof is there, but you resist.
You resist, not because you have proof
You resist, because you like the life that you choose.
If God exists, that presents a threat
So you hide behind agnosticism as an excuse not to repeant
I plea ignorance! I plea Ingnorance! You shout loudly down the halls of reality.
For you do not want to trancend above what is imaginary.

Ive been there before, for i was agnostic to
God was asking me to do things that i did not want to do
So i refused to look at the evidence before me
The gospel of Jesus Christ use to bore me

But now bigbang cosmology has proven its worth
I now know that the universe is a product of a birth
The agnostic wishes and hopes for another explainer
Becuase now the evidence is working in Gods favor!

Peace.
 
freesoulhope said:
Its simple common sense that God exists
The common sense proof is there, but you resist.
You resist, not because you have proof
You resist, because you like the life that you choose.
If God exists, that presents a threat
So you hide behind agnosticism as an excuse not to repeant
I plea ignorance! I plea Ingnorance! You shout loudly down the halls of reality.
For you do not want to trancend above what is imaginary.

Ive been there before, for i was agnostic to
God was asking me to do things that i did not want to do
So i refused to look at the evidence before me
The gospel of Jesus Christ use to bore me

But now bigbang cosmology has proven its worth
I now know that the universe is a product of a birth
The agnostic wishes and hopes for another explainer
Becuase now the evidence is working in Gods favor!
Click to expand...
Common sense is fine on the street;
On the chalkboard, it is not meet
To assume that ‘it’s obvious!’ will pass muster –
Rather, it is yet more unseemly bluster.

God is no threat, if loving is he;
But Lovecraftian deities seem as likely to me.
Who will be eaten first? I’ll volunteer;
If to heaven or hell, may my efforts be clear.
I strive for good, as best I can tell
And hope if you’re right, that God’s pretty swell.
 
Atheists are very closed minded, with all due respect my dear friend. Peace be upon you.
 
MerryAtheist said:
That’s why I said it’s an opinion based on evidence. …
Click to expand...
So that kind of reasoning is acceptable to you as proof, but God isn’t when he is found to be true by the same reasoning?
MerryAtheist said:
That’s fine…
Click to expand...
So you agree that the world popping out of nothing is illogical.
MerryAtheist said:
But I was not referring to “reality” - I was referring to "existence”,
Click to expand...
Call it what ever you like, you exist in it, that is enough for me. Try to answer the question, rather the avoid it.
MerryAtheist said:
And I think the scientific evidence of the randomness of nature and the universe is self-evident. Of course, I expect you would disagree with that statement. …
Click to expand...
Randomness needs a foundation of order; the universe, (an existing thing), has that order upon which random things can occur. Randomness does not explain why the universe is here; neither does it explain why it has produced what we see around us. It does not matter whether it has come about by random variations or not; it is the thing that it has produced and where that production came from, that I am concerned with.
MerryAtheist said:
The bottom-line for me is that no one knows what existed prior to the universe…
Click to expand...
Nothing existed, so far as time matter and space is concerned. Secondly there was no “before” since that would require time, and time “began”, “came in to being”, it is finite. The universe is the material everything; the material everything had a beginning. It is therefore rational that there is an ultimate cause for everything because we see that material things rely upon that which came before it, in order for it to exist. It is unreasonable to me that the world came out of “nothing” by its self, because that would be a miracle with out a miracle worker, and if I am to believe in miracles and think them rational, then I will use my initiative and common-sense, and choose God.

You haven’t tried to disprove anything I have said; you have only written pretty words like “fallacious” without explaining why it is. I think that you would like to “think” that the first cause is fallacious, because it presents a threat to you; but laughing it away won’t change the fact that it is the only reasonable concept that explains the natural world. By the way, Big Bang Cosmology proves that there was a beginning to time space and matter, therefore the cause cannot have the nature of space time and matter! Common sense. Unless you would like me to think that the world popped out of nothing, maybe you should claim the title of agnosticism; as we both know that atheism implies something that is illogical to human reasoning. Since I do not appeal to willful ignorance, and atheism is illogical in theory, I am forced to except the only possible explanation that is left. God
 
MerryAtheist said:
Hey! It’s a poetry smackdown!

We’ll know it’s getting close to blows when they switch to limericks…
Click to expand...
There was a young atheist named Merry
Holding views that appeared quite contrary.
He said, “I’M not scared,
For I’m my own laird,”
But ontologically God’s necessary.
 
cpayne said:
There was a young atheist named Merry
Holding views that appeared quite contrary.
He said, “I’M not scared,
For I’m my own laird,”
But ontologically God’s necessary.
Click to expand...
har! har!

Next it’s on to Haiku’s…
 
031064 said:
Atheists are very closed minded, with all due respect my dear friend. Peace be upon you.
Click to expand...
Same could be said for those holding a particular religious dogma. I’m tired of people here classifying whole groups of people as one and the same. Just as individuals within the Catholic faith vary, so do atheists. YOU made a closed-minded statement.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top