Atheist Churches, For Real?

nope. There is no such thing as a practicing atheist. Like there is no such thing as a lay person practicing "not medicine".

 

Over at CARM where Kokomojojo got his Matt Slick fail quote from, they have a cabal of idiots, the chief among whom was a nutjob called Nouveau. Even with the forum moderation heavily biased towards his religious dogma the guy could not stand being contradicted and proved wrong such that as soon as he was 'rekt' he burst into a flurry of making new threads and bumping his old threads up the page to cover up his ineptitude. I'm so glad we don't have posters like that over here.

 

Religious people are practicing atheists, they practice on other religions but, haven't overcome the one they follow as yet. With enough practice they could get there.

 

So....why do you believe that psychic snowflakes don't exist?

 

Yeah. It might be that some are sensitive to the concept that God knows, while mere mortals believe.

 

I don't. I lack a belief in them as there is no evidence to suggest they exist. believing in non existence is not the same as lacking belief in existence.

 

Perhaps because there is absolutely no evidence that they do and massive data to suggest they do not?

 

There you go. Your reasoning as to why you don't believe in Psychic Snow flakes. I don't believe in them either.

 

you have to prove a god exists, before you can claim that god "knows" anything.

 

Have you attempted the same for your God?

 

In the one about money. Link me the video and time in the video so I can verify your claims.

 

bias is irrelevant, your problem is that you are unable to defeat his arguments.

 

What data?

 

Look around, there is no evidence to prove math exists.

 

sure there is, atheists have the own dogma and admit they have faith and morals and live accordingly.

 

It is impossible to prove something outside this universe exists. It is also impossible to prove there isn't something outside this universe, man has hung the word god on.

To say a god exist outside of this universe is done on faith alone.

To say it does not exist is done on faith alone. What is so hard to understand about this? Well, some people just refuse to accept what is a fact.

Neither side can prove squat, and yet both sides dishonestly act as if they can. It is a helluva thing. And absurd.

Oh, the atheists say you cannot prove a negative. And yet if god does exist, it exist independent and outside this universe for we cannot find IT in the universe. So, they are playing little intellectual games that have no meaning. Except they cannot see how meaningless their arguments are.

So one has to assume, yes assume, that nothing exists independent of and outside this universe. For there is no way to actually know if something does or does not exist outside of this universe. So, people assume, and then in their ego arrogance write checks their arses cannot pay. Such is the nature of these egos we are so sure of.

If one cannot see this, then a mind is inept, irrational, illogical, and useless as teats on a boar hog.

This is why I am an agnostic. People like me understand the limitation of human knowledge, and are humble enough to admit it. It is only ego arrogance which is incapable of admitting the obvious.

And this may very well be the means test which determines if a mind is sane or insane. And it looks to me like I am surrounded by the insane. And yet every insane person who ever lived was ruled over by an insane ego. For that is what goes insane. And if one cannot figure out how impossible it is to prove what is being discussed, then clearly we are speaking of an insane mind. No matter how many letters other insane people gave you to put after your name.

 

Do you know anyone that has been denying the Holocaust or Twoofering on the internet? Just asking.

Matt Slick is a moron, if I want to discuss his apologetics with him I'll go find him. You are a member here, I'll discuss it with you so, make your case, if you can.

 

The lack of data after researching a thing eventually becomes data to indicate a negative search result and thus a debunking of hypothesis.

 

You mean is an accepted ASSumption so we can flush proof down the drain as far as atheists are concerned. How many times have people posted absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

ASSumptions are FAITH based conclusions, so much for the atheist high road of proof!

 

I am well aware of your opinion concerning the scientific process and preference for theism. I also know your use of the term "Assumption" is meant to be a tool of redirection and disruption of discussion. However, assumption is a standard activity in virtually EVERY thought humans have and a valued quality in rational thought. Your attempt to use it as a negative indicates dishonest and biased debate considering the level of assumption required to accept your own position.

 

Your mistake, scientific process has nothing to do with my opinion and everything to do with procedural standards. I never said I was for theism, however they are far more rational than anything I have seen here produced by the atheists. Well assumption is out of bounds, an illegal move, against hoyle, NFG, when it comes to scientific method. Oh but atheist attempt to use lack of belief as a negative is perfectly acceptable and honest as far as you are concerned. You see no matter which port atheists turn to everything they produce is hypocrite.

 

William Rea debates Matt Slick:

Good job William, you showed him!!

 

You think cutting the end off of your penis because god told them to is rational, or flying jets into buildings, self flagellation, etc, etc all rational!

 

you think the atheist stalin murdering millions just to insure there are no challengers to his power is sanity

 

What the Stalin educated to be a priest, who brought back religion to make his people fight harder, that Stalin?