This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
sree251 · 41-45, M
I have to give a point to the fat guy in this debate. He is right about atheism being just a flat out rejection of theism and nothing more Theism is indeed a worldview. However, rejection alone is not enough. The fat guy has to present an argument to debunk theism; or, at least, ask the theist to give a basis for his belief that God created the world.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
sree251 · 41-45, M
@Emosaur The onus is on you to prove that my contention is wrong.
If you are a bird that can't fly and I come along to tell you to learn how to fly because God created us to fly, asking me to prove that I am speaking the truth shows that you are resistant to being better than what you are.
If you are a bird that can't fly and I come along to tell you to learn how to fly because God created us to fly, asking me to prove that I am speaking the truth shows that you are resistant to being better than what you are.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
Carazaa · F
@sree251 Good logic is not denying a theory without coming up with another theory. How did the first cell happen if a higher intelligence didn't create it? If they can't tell us something that makes sense then the best we have is the Bible, God's word. Whenever we want to do investigative work in a crime foreinstance, saying "he didn't do it" is not good enough. Then who did it?
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
sree251 · 41-45, M
@Carazaa Atheism is not another theory. It is - as the fat guy said - just a rejection of theism. Atheists are followers of another religion: science. Even though scientists are groping in the dark like blind men trying to figure out the elephant, their guesses about the nature of the beast are accepted by atheists as better alternatives to the elephant. It doesn't matter if the beast is ridiculously bizarre, atheists just hate the elephant.
Your crime analogy works if the suspect in the criminal investigation is the only one capable of committing the crime. Let's consider God is the name of a girl locked in a kitchen with all the equipment and ingredients for making a cake. An hour later, the kitchen is unlocked and in it is the girl with a cake. No sane atheist would deny that God didn't make it. However, atheists are not sane. They insist that the ingredients came together, went into the oven, and came out as a cake.
Your crime analogy works if the suspect in the criminal investigation is the only one capable of committing the crime. Let's consider God is the name of a girl locked in a kitchen with all the equipment and ingredients for making a cake. An hour later, the kitchen is unlocked and in it is the girl with a cake. No sane atheist would deny that God didn't make it. However, atheists are not sane. They insist that the ingredients came together, went into the oven, and came out as a cake.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
sree251 · 41-45, M
@HarryHawk I don't expect anything; least of all, anyone to believe me. What do you think I come here for? I express my opinion because I like to reflect on what I read on the forum. You can say that I like talking to myself. And I don't expect anyone to join me in the conversation.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment