QUESTION to ALL Atheists!

a reply to: [post=18681401]TechUnique[/post

I wish they stopped speaking of God as HE... Not a he nor she. God is described in the oldest scriptures, the holy Vedas as being the entire universe, the supreme being, and everything is connected... A book once described God as being like electricity. Nothing can exist without it, it is flowing thru everything, even us, all planets,.. But definitely not a HE, that's the biggest thing I don't agree with, they make God sound like a man watching us..

originally posted by: TechUnique

The bible has been edited to raise concerns of its validity. Same reason the catholic church translated it into Latin and persecuted any peasants caught reading it. Because it's the truth! That's why we've got a watered down and modded Bible because they 'Occult new world order' knew they couldn't eradicate the word of God so they just perverted it instead.

Um... Ok, so you're saying the Bible that you get your information from is watered down and "modded"?

Then later you go on to say this:

TechUnique

LOL. Genital mutilation is another perverse additive to religion. Note how I said additive. Religion is perverse itself. I am going to say something that will make your ears bleed but it's true.

I'm not PART of a religion, I may be religious... but I do not subscribe to man made religion. The bible is not man made religion it is written THROUGH MAN, BY GOD.

You have to realize the difference.

So what is it? The bible is edited, watered down and "modded", or is the bible "ot man made religion it is written THROUGH MAN, BY GOD"?

Do you understand why people say there is a lot of contradiction in religion and in particular Christianity?

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

No agnosticism is the honest "I do not know" of someone. If you don't know, you should not be forced to take a stance. Sorry but I am truely confused by your attack on agnosticism. I respect their honesty. I similarly respect a theistic or a-theistic person, as long as they are honest about it, and don't try to force me to change my ways If they do, they meet the barbarian

a reply to: pheonix358

I disagree with you. There is always middle ground but you seem to want to stay at one extreme or another.

Logic disagrees with you.

Law of the Excluded middle.

Zing.

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Where or how do you come up with these ideas?

They are just .... yea mate.

Zing? You may want to look that up in a dictionary.\\

P

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Umm those "laws" are not laws in the physical sciences sense, and thus are always open for debate and reinterpretation.

a reply to: Noinden

Sorry but I am truely confused by your attack on agnosticism.

Agnosticism is a claim of neutrality as I have said. A person's world view is not based on an I don't know. A person's world view is based on a definite there is a God or there isn't. There is no way around that. Its not an attack its simply a statement. Refer to my definition of a world view it might help you understand why I say no one is neutral when it comes to a world view. Can someone be neutral in a war? Sure. Can the be neutral in your overall perspective and interpretation of the physical events that occur in that war? No.

a reply to: pheonix358

Why don't you respond to my point? The law of the excluded middle clearly states there a statement is either true or false never in a "grey area." So no neutrality in logic.

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Oh FFS .... neutrality is not the same as "not knowing". Not knowing is not knowing. I don't know what the winning numbers in tomorrows lottery are but I am certainly not neutral over them.

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
a reply to: Noinden

Sorry but I am truely confused by your attack on agnosticism.

Agnosticism is a claim of neutrality as I have said. A person's world view is not based on an I don't know. A person's world view is based on a definite there is a God or there isn't. There is no way around that. Its not an attack its simply a statement. Refer to my definition of a world view it might help you understand why I say no one is neutral when it comes to a world view. Can someone be neutral in a war? Sure. Can the be neutral in your overall perspective and interpretation of the physical events that occur in that war? No.

So your point is that religious affiliation is a war and you must fight on one side or the other? Utterly ridiculous.

My world view is based on the world. That's why it's called a world view not a god view. Your world view is based on the world view of a bunch of Roman elites from 2000 years ago.

Try thinking for yourself one of these days, if that's even possible at this point.

a reply to: Noinden

Umm those "laws" are not laws in the physical sciences sense, and thus are always open for debate and reinterpretation.

Oh well lets continue this discussion and I will pretend that I can reinterpret the law of noncontradiction and the law of identity and the law of the excluded middle. Considering that these three laws are what govern rational discourse I don''t think we are going to get anywhere

Those "laws" are the basis of mathematics. How are you going to do the majority of physical science without mathematics ? Those "laws" are how you produce a concept of a physical law, so you better hope that those are right or all your physical science is wrong....

a reply to: Noinden

Oh FFS .... neutrality is not the same as "not knowing". Not knowing is not knowing. I don't know what the winning numbers in tomorrows lottery are but I am certainly not neutral over them.

Strawman. We are talking about world views man. Read my definition of a world view. No person is neutral in that aspect.

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

FFS, you know what ... you keep on that understanding of how the sciences work, and you are never going to understand them.... I am pretty sure I've lost a few IQ points trying to talk with you.

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Your definition is just that ... your definition. Its not a straw man. I am talking to the accepted way agnosticism has been viewed. You however seem to be trying to build a rather dry grass based argument here, and being very unsubtle about it. Indeed you seem to be at odds with the rest of us here. Perhaps you should consider that.

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
a reply to: BlackManINC

He probably ask these questions because he loves you, and wants to try and show you that God is there.

Ok, Mr. ServantOfTheLamb, how do you propose you "show" them that God is there that hasn't been done a million times already? Mind you, if you can "show" anybody that God is anywhere, if this is in fact what you mean, then that is not the one true God of the Bible, as there is no way you can "show" God is anywhere because God cannot be put under a microscope.

a reply to: tavi45

So your point is that religious affiliation is a war and you must fight on one side or the other? Utterly ridiculous.

No not my point at all. If you had read my post for what it said rather than having an opinion of me before it started you might have noticed that I said someone can be neutral in a war, but not neutral in there perspective and interepretation of the PHYSICAL EVENTS that occur in that war.

My world view is based on the world. That's why it's called a world view not a god view. Your world view is based on the world view of a bunch of Roman elites from 2000 years ago.

If your world view is the more logical one then please give me a justification for believing that the laws of Logic are absolute and universal and independent of the material world, the principle of the uniformity in nature, and the belief that you can know objective truth. Then tell me how much of truth can you know, and with how much certainty?

a reply to: BlackManINC

I don't have to show you He is there, you already know him. Your problem is not one of intellect its one of sin. Be very open and honest with me for a little bit. What is your world view? How much can we know and with how much certainty? Are we beings with intrinsic value or are we ultimately evolved star stuff fizzing to our dna?

My world view is simple as you have a huge manual to go read about what I believe.

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
a reply to: BlackManINC

I don't have to show you He is there, you already know him. Your problem is not one of intellect its one of sin. Be very open and honest with me for a little bit. What is your world view? How much can we know and with how much certainty? Are we beings with intrinsic value or are we ultimately evolved star stuff fizzing to our dna?

My world view is simple as you have a huge manual to go read about what I believe.

My "worldview" is simple, I let the Bible speak for itself and let all men stand as liars, and the Bible states that the heart rules the mind, and the heart is more deceitful above all things and desperately wicked. The atheists knows that God exists because the evidence of his existence is in the things that are made, evidence of an intelligence, a designer, which can only be supernatural. The mind is telling them that God exists, but in their heart, they don't want to believe it, and no amount of evidence you bring forth will change that.

a reply to: BlackManINC

So you're saying our existence and intelligence demands a creator?
How much more intelligent must the creators mind be?
So intelligent, it too requires an explanation for its existence?
If God doesn't require a creator to explain its existence, why do we?

a reply to: Noinden

First that is like a text book definition of a world view, and I defined it so we could have a conversation. Second it is a straw man. Lottery numbers and World views are not similar in any aspect....I am not arguing that people are neutral of the future because they don't know it. I am telling you that people operate in reality and have beliefs about reality base on their world view. Their world view is never neutral and it is never I don't know because I don't know in world view scenarios lead to neutrality. Example, When a ball is thrown up in Earth's atmosphere will it continue up or fall back down? Atheist Down Theist Down Agnostic I don't know(Neither Up nor Down this is Neutrality when) If you think its not tell me why its not don't just say its not.