 |
|
| Browse | Ask | Answer | Search | Join/Login |
|
|
||||
|
Nohelp is correct, there are literally hundreds of gods out there that cannot be proven.
|
||||
|
|
|
||||
 Originally Posted by N0help4u
If theists would just believe in their deity/deities, there would be no "objective-subjective debate". But (some) theists can't accept that there are people who have different world views. And these theists insists that their own personal religious views should be the views of all. For me nobody has to prove anything - that being subject to theists accepting that there are people with different views, and to stopping their un-constitutional attempts to force their religious views on to non-theists. :rolleyes: · |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
I guess I just don't see 'Theists INSISTING that their own personal religious views should be the views of all so I can't understand the objective/subjective *debate*
|
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Seems more that gods do not exist at all... :D :rolleyes: :D :rolleyes: :D · |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Originally Posted by Credendovidis
Trillions... mmm? I think you are getting a little carried away here... sound like one your imfamous unprove claims andBELIEFS... Niether can you prove a magical Big Bang that was intelligent enough to make the universe.. lol So we are in the same boat my friend.. :D |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Originally Posted by N0help4u
|
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
No and I have asked for specific direct quotes that show that and haven't gotten any
Replies other than more accusations that they do it. I do see an occasional My denomination is the right one though |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
There is no evidence that there is not a teapot orbiting around Jupiter, yet you don't believe adamantly that there is, do you?
|
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Capuchin
That is not the point and has already been covered here. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
[QUOTE]
Originally Posted by Credendovidis
Yes like the empty claims you make about your unproven magical Big Bang which you have been claiming is a fact and yet have failed to prove it. :D
If theists would just believe in their deity/deities, there would be no "objective-subjective debate".
But (some) theists can't accept that there are people who have different world views. And these theists insists that their own personal religious views should be the views of all. Apparently you are the one who can't accept that there are people out there like theist who do not share your athiestic beliefs. It obviously bothers you considering you spend at least 60% of your spare time on a religious forum trying to promote your beliefs as being better. Like I said before we don't need someone trying to convert us to their beliefs.. we are quite happy as theists and we would much appreciate it if you didn't waist your time with your humanistic propaganda.
For me nobody has to prove anything - that being subject to theists accepting that there are people with different views, and to stopping their un-constitutional attempts to force their religious views on to non-theists.
|
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Originally Posted by Capuchin
The premise behind this argument is that if a claim is unprovable, then it's in the same category as everything that is deliberately made up or fictionalized. However, not only is this false and a mere play on words, but it is a complete straw man argument because it falsely redefines the opposing position in terms that make it more easily attackable, using false comparisons. That analogy does not make any sense because there is nothing the existence an orbiting teapot have to show for anything. However the existence of God explains the existence of the universe and throughout history millions of honest, sane, intelligent people have experiences with God which resulted in life changing effects, but the same can't be said about your orbiting tea pot which makes your comparison invalid. And also just because something is unprovable does not automatically put it in the same category as everything else that is unprovable. For example, I can't prove what I ate last night for dinner or what I thought about. Without witnesses, I can't prove what I saw on TV or how high I scored in a video game either. But that doesn't mean that these things are in the same category as every story in the fiction section of the library. So pleas if you are going to have an intelligent debate about something, please make reasonable points instead of these invalid cheap and played out analogies. :rolleyes: |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Well you never know Sassy aliens could drink tea and could have lost their pot.
|
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Originally Posted by N0help4u
|
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Originally Posted by sassyT
|
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Originally Posted by sassyT
This in stark contrast to the total lack of any objective supporting evidence for the religious creation claim. Why do you always try to twist everything and/or tamper with quotations by making false suggestions as to what was really stated? Perhaps because you can not support your own religious wild claims ? :rolleyes: · |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Maybe if you attended a science class that teaches about advanced scientific theories you would know why the big bang is presented as a theory. I'm not going to try to prove it to you because anything I say about it your either going to say I'm wrong or god did that way. Frankly I have decided that I created the world last Tuesday and created you all with memory of days before that simply to amuse myself. You can't prove me wrong so it must be true.
|
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
As I have already said even with all the scientific proof in the world HOW does it DISPROVE God? Scientific proof does not mean God did not create it.
|
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
It doesn't, you can't disprove something that doesn't exist. It's not possible. Especially things like gods. Who have no properties of matter. By their very nature gods are set up so that they can't be disproven because if you could disprove it almost no one would believe it. Even if you claim god did something like creating the universe, if we prove the big bang was the start of it all. All it means to religious people is that god used the big bang to create the universe and it doesn't disprove him at all.
If 100% of the people who believed in religion were like most people who believe in religion, it wouldn't be that big a deal. The problem is the people on the edge. The people who halt progress in the name of religion. The people who insist I live my life according to their religion. The people who would do harm because of their religion. The people who knock on my door at 8o'clock on a Saturday morning and insist on telling me about their religion and don't go away when I don't answer the door after 10 minutes of them knocking and ringing the bell. If some of the people who believe in Santa Clause and unicorns used their believe to justify these crimes, I wouldn't like them either. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Exactly
|
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Originally Posted by michealb
That's true, for me science just proves to me that the natural world is created in such a way that I cannot deny the existence of a Creator. And the thing is that individuals cannot go out on their own to research the organisms/systems in nature to strengthen their beliefs in a Creator,we need the people who do such research in order for us to understand better the works of the Almighty. Not to divert away from the main point,but was there something in history that actually made believers deny science or for science to deny the possibility of a Creator? I cannot understand the need to deny one to believe in the other. |
||||
|
|
Not your question?
Ask your question
View similar questions
| Question Tools | Search this Question |
Check out some similar questions!
Objective of Macroeconomics
[ 5 Answers ]
The ultimate objective of macroeconomics is to a. reduce the unemployment rate b. stabilize the economy's growth rate c. develop and test theories about how the overall economy works d. improve the international competitiveness of the U.S. financial markets e. maximize the efficiency of...
Thought-objects purely subjective?
[ 3 Answers ]
Are thought-objects purely subjective phenomena? Can concepts arise out of immediate, individual perception, or are they acquired by individuals through social practice.
Objective statement
[ 1 Answers ]
I will be graduating with a degree in accounting this spring and am in the process of writing a resume and was wondering if I could get some opinions on the following objective statement? To obtain a challenging position in the accounting industry that will provide experience and knowledge...
Objective
[ 1 Answers ]
What is something good to put under Objective on you Resume?
Objective
[ 17 Answers ]
What am I suppose to put for an objective when I don't have any goals and I don't have much job exerpience?
View more questions Search
|
