Atheism V's Theism.

Do you believe that things cannot possibly happen unless someone knows they have happened?

 

That is not what you originally stated. "Socrates explains it really well in Plato's "The Republic." Who did you say explains it real well? Of course.... Socrates... Well guess what... a lot of Christians believe that Jesus said a lot of things that are portrayed by the various authors of the New Testament... yet non-theists will claim that Jesus was a myth... Christians will be ridiculed for believing in the 'fairy tale' known as the Bible. .... So, it only sounds reasonable that Christians should have and exercise the same privilege of ridiculing non-theists for their trust, belief, faith, confidence in the teachings of that mythological creature known as Socrates... The disciples of Socrates have claimed he existed and that he taught them... so goodness,,, it must be true...

 

Pretend I said "the character of Socrates" if it will make you feel better and get you to drop this non sequitur. I haven't made any claims about the existence of Jesus or Socrates. Whether they existed or not isn't the issue of this thread, and it certainly isn't relevant to the point I was making.

 

Sure, as long as that "someone" is God. Is there some reason I shouldn't?

 

The existence of Socrates is very relevant to the topic of this thread. Your reliance on the teachings of Socrates as displayed in your bragging about those alleged sayings indicates that Socrates must be of some real substance else Socrates belongs to that imaginary realm of fantastical beings. Socrates also has relevance to the point that you attempted to make, else Socrates would not have been required as an example of the point you were attempting to make. Socrates is a myth and you are a disciple of that mythological creature. This is exemplified in your own words of praise and worship of Socrates.

 

Are you going to address my point that there is such a thing as objective morality? Please stop quoting me if you're going to keep following along this tangent.

 

OP loves his double standards. Unconscious material must have a creator, but a highly powerful and intelligent being does not. We cannot exist by chance and must have a purpose, but god can exist by chance and have no purpose. herp derp.

 

Why address such a point when you have openly indicated that the point was best explained by a mythological creature called Socrates? To address the point would only serve to validate the point and by validating the point would also serve to validate the existence of that mythological creature you call Socrates.

I quote most everyone where I believe that there is the possibility of me being accused of misquoting or misrepresenting what has been said.

 

It's a fallacy called special pleading. Most people simply ignore the logical inconsistency of saying that one thing must have a creator and another doesn't. Some people try to justify it by saying that God isn't a "creation" in a physical sense, but is some sort of weird eternal consciousness or incorporeal entity, which in itself is a weird statement because I'm not sure how a mental process or an incorporeal entity can create anything and nobody who uses this rebuttal can explain how either.

 

A simple "no" would have worked.

 

No, saying that the universe doesn't require a creator, that its just a magic randomly appearing ball of pure energy ... which just happens, but that not knowing what Created God means that the later is valid.

Its called utterly illogical.

 

So basically we've shown that science has hypothesises and theories that explain the opening post but religious people will just continue to logical fallacy the crap out of it anyway.

 

I'm not sure how that had any relation to what I was talking about, but okay. Next point, nice strawman, again. No scientist or atheist is claiming that the Universe was created through magic. Actually, that is basically what your religion is saying since nobody can seem to explain how God created the Universe.

 

Perhaps it would have been simpler to just say no. On the other hand, a simple no would not have allowed me the opportunity to once again slam that Socrates fairy tale and those who blatantly use Socrates to support their arguments. You might as well have chosen Humpty Dumpty as your role model resource.

 

They Socrates fairy tale? Oh, do go on.

 

And we've shown that atheists use neither science nor hypothesi, but see fallacy everywhere ... in short, atheism appears to have a problem with reality. Because the statement above is ... a fully evidenced arguement in atheism. Its a one liner devoid of much thought to everyone else.

 

Then I suggest you use that big atheist brain to figure it out - or at least ask a clarifying question as opposed to merely rudely sticking yor head in the sand.

Atheists cannot exoplain what came before the Big Bang, is the Big Bang therefors NOT a valid scientific theory? We cannot explain where RNA become more than that, so abiogenesis is right out?

Perhaps you shouls stop reading common atheist propoganda, and actually think about something before you blandly dump in on the forum as if, because it came from atheist gospel, it must be infallable.

Seriously, I see things like this and wonder if there are not a couple of guys sitting in AA just making up stupid things for kicks, and wondering how many clowns they can get to buy the crap without thinking?

 

... How does somebody rudely stick their head in the sand?

The Big Bang is a very valid scientific theory. What came before the Big Bang, however, isn't a part of the Big Bang theory.

Huh? I have no idea how life started. Could've been a natural event, could've been a supernatural event but I think that possibility is doubtful since we have never had any evidence of anything supernatural ever happening, which is why we call it "supernatural" and not natural.

I don't claim infallibility, your Bible does.

...Saying that nobody is saying that the Universe was created magically (except for theists until they can come up with some procedure of how God created the Universe) is making up stupid things for kicks? Huh? That seems to be what you are doing since nowhere does magic enter the picture until you say that God somehow created the Universe from nothing and can't provide an explanation for how that happened. We simply don't know how the Universe started existing or even if it did start existing. Is that argument too rational for you to confront, so you have to make up a strawman where we are actually saying that it was magic?

 

It's the same argument they use against evolution.

The Theory of Evolution can't explain how life came about, ergo, ToE is wrong. Pity ToE isn't about the creation of life.

 

THat you for perfectly proving the point.

Where God came from has no bearing on the idea that God created the universe. Or it does, and by the same standard we just erased the Big Bang theory? Nice.

YOu signed up for it.

Agh, well, since you don;t know the origins of the answer you are, in your own words, using logical fallacy. Tsk tsk.

Congrats, you just eliminated abiogenesis from science.

Oh, you don't? You just never admit fault - gotcha - like acknowledging that your post about knowing the origins of the origin does not invalidate something?

My Bible is filled with things like ... parable, and in the sense of the message it proclaims, it is indeed infallable. It interpretation is not, however.

Right, the Big Bang just magically farted itself into existence. But you aren't using magic because you say so. Gotcha.

 

Well, using the standard GP just told us, unless you KNOW defintively the origin of life, TOE is indeed invalid - fallacious even.

I don;t subscribe to that standard. YOu do - at least in applying it to others, which gets back at that lack of standards and accountability issue in atheism. Odd how that keeps popping up.

Well, enjoy the cool aid!

 

Which isn't what anybody is saying. Where God came from does have bearing when someone is claiming that everything has to have a creator, does it not?

...You really need to slow down and actually read what I said. I said that declaring at one point that everything has to have a creator and then declaring that God doesn't have a creator is a fallacy known as special pleading. I'm not sure how saying "I don't know how life started" is a logical fallacy.

I never claimed it did, which is something you would know if you didn't simply hit reply after you see a post of mine and actually read what I posted first.

Okay.

Uh... no, read my words again.

How "We simply don't know how the Universe started existing or even if it did start existing." translates to "The Universe was created by magic" in your head is curious.

 

If you claim that everything needs a creator, you can't claim god does not need a creator. If you acknowledge that some magical being can exist without a creator, there is no consistency in claiming the material which expanded into the universe DOES need a creator. Either all things need a creator or they don't. You have no consistency, evidence, or logic in explaining that everything but god needs a creator. Incredibly irrational.

 

I don't. I just claim it isn't relevant to the idea that God created the universe is all. Just like knowing the origins of the Big Bang does not undermine the Big Bang.

I realize such a common sense application ofobjective standard invalidates a major trend in atheist propoganda, but perhaps atheists should have though of that before they published and desseminated an arguement on their websites with such a simple and easily rebutted fault. Perhaps?

 

Thank you for the changing goal post. When someone says knowing the origins of God is beyond our knowledge at the moment, as is the origins of the Big Bang, the poingt is irreevant to the idea that God created the universe.

What does atheist indoctrinated in unthinking propoganda and depserate to hold onto his hypocritical application of fallacy read? "You guys are claiming that God does not have a Creator!!!" A changed goal post, and a strawman.

And we do know how the universe started existing, its called the Big Bang. Seriously, do you stop to think these things through at all?