@MasterLee:

let us sum up:
just an observation. sorry if it made you angry.

U's friend is angry. remember?

Oh, that's right. That doesn't count because he was ... what was it ... "browbeaten"? Is that what you made up?

OOH! I'm sorry. Am I "browbeating" you now, by rubbing your nose in your own filth?

Sorry again, if I made you angry again. I really should just let you get away with it so you don't feel browbeaten and angry again.

You win. Have a nice day :-)


That's amazing. Are you on a braille system?

Oh - and right about here is where you attacked U and twisted his whole story when he said there are angry atheists out there and he is in fact close to one.


I defended U, which you are twisting to say I am attacking, because that is what you do, apparently ...


You were "trying to get me to calm down" by attacking me:


These are attacks, clearly trying to bait me into defending. They do not relate to anything I said in any way, shape of form.


well, DUUUUH ... ! lol


yes. even though I already told you I wasn't angry, I was laughing at you.

i will refrain from capital letters if them make you angry.

by the way, there were no messages in all caps. there was one word in all caps for emphasis.

do you know that word?

em

pha

sis

for the record, the word does not mean "angry".


well, I'm really glad you didn't take the bai.

by shift and pivot, do you mean "ask you to defend yourself" after rebutting your earlier remarks?

yes, i actually wish you would address those issues.

but you won't.



more rash and false accusations. is that all you have?


i have been calm throughout. please stop using your shift key. some of us are very sensitive to capital letters.


what the hell are you talking about? lol

i would call your a moron, but you're more off than on, so i'm going to call you a moroff.

enjoy being off.

you're boring and i'm done.

@StrictLoving: Try and feel better. Athiests aren't your enemy. Be nice. Your attacks are mildly amusing. Lose the anger and hate. Just my observations but you will be better when you do.

Oh and I forgive you for being so angry and full of hate.

@Urchoice: Exactly. The opposite, and the phrasing of your question is however not holding any logic.

@SapphicHeart: u guy like to have it easy don't you. There's logic in that question. If I'd said God does exist. You can certainly prove that there's​ no integer or natural number x satisfying the equation x square equals negative 1. X^2=-1. You can prove that integer does not exist.

@Urchoice: You can't prove to me there is any god(s). Proof is on your part. I don't have to proof something not existing. That's exactly where your logic is missing out. Quite simple, actually. Hmm.

Yeah, I didn't think y'all actually knew what you were talking about.

Descartes is often misquoted as "I think therefore I am."

He was actually trying to doubt his own existence, which he could do, but could not doubt that he was doubting. That somewhere there was a thing that was in the act of doubting, and that that thing was him. Realizing that the doubting thing must exist in order to doubt, he reasoned, "I doubt, therefore I am."

"je pense, donc je suis."

Having concluded this, he immediately found satisfaction in it, and concluded that "to know is better than to doubt".

He could not conceive how he could have known this by himself, so he concluded there was a Creator, and that the Creator bestowed this knowledge upon him.

He then reasoned that the Creator was a benevolent one and would not lie. Therefore the Bible must be true, etc.

He pretty much went from "I think therefore I am." [sic] to totally justifying 17th century French life in about five lines.

So ... keep going! You are not far from finding God!

@StrictLoving: so he 'tried to prove his nonexistence' blah blah god exists is your statement? Good crack there.

@MasterLee: well, it's an interesting "rest of the story" that most people don't know. "I think therefore I am" is something everyone knows, or thinks they know. They don't realize that God himself was rationalized into existence almost immediately thereafter and the entire Bible justified not long after that.

"I think therefore I am" is held so high, yet I don't think anyone else is swayed by the rest of his reasoning!

It is interesting to note that many arguments for the existence of a Creator hings upon evidence such as the origin of the universe, life, and other things which are observed in the world.

Descartes had no problem at all doubting the existence of all creation! He had dreams that he knew were not real - and if those worlds didn't exist, how could he have any faith in the world he observed while he was "awake"!?

So for him, the entire observable world was "doubtable", but he could not doubt his own doubting, therefore thinking, therefore his own existence. "I doubt, therefore I think, therefore I am."

And he could not doubt that knowing was better than doubting, and he could not doubt that this knowledge came, not from within himself, but from a benevolent Creator.

Interesting thought process. He set out to prove that God does not exist and ended up proving to himself that He does.

@MsAnnThropy: True, but this does nothing to aid the claim that atheists are right. There is no wresting of a default in un-know-ability.

@Peekaboo: The atheists position is that they don't believe in god because evidence for its existence is lacking. Nothing to do with who is right or wrong. Everything to do with atheism is not a claim.

@Sarah123: but you do ... !

@StrictLoving: That doesn't even make sense.

@Kindhearted guy: God gave you free moral agency. He does not control you or anyone else. To suggest that bad things in the world are proof that God does not exist is to demonstrate a complete lack of knowledge of the true nature of God.

The question is, why would a person take their God given free moral agency and do something heinous such as abuse a child?

The answer is that there is a dark force in the world. An entity which hates God and which will do anything it can to keep a person from finding God. That spirit has many names, but is easily discernible.

To the devil, it doesn't matter if you get hooked on drugs, sex, porn, video games or serial murder. As long as it's not God's agenda for your life - so long as he can keep you ignorant and distant from God, then he wins.

God gave you free moral agency and a choice: life and blessing, or death and cursing. It is God's will that you choose life. The choice is yours.


Would you prefer to live in a world where God takes away your freedoms of choice?

What God did that child neglect or piss off?

@Nate931: good reasoning. Usually when people say there's​ a ghost in the house they try to prove it with some physical evidence. Table shaking by itself without​ any input motion, light switch going on/off etc. You're right, to answer the question in the post we need more parameters. I'm talking of an omnipotent being who was there before the big bang, who made it happen. From that explosion came at least one universe that's​ mixes chaos and harmony to create perfect structures. Structures we can't​ reproduce. Minerals have cohesion, plants add the ability to grow, animals are made of minerals and can grow like plants but have instincts on top of that. Humans have all the previous and can think at a very advance level. They can solve very difficult problems, harvest things like electricity, engage in activities like agriculture etc. Humans also have a spiritual part that science is not yet ready to discuss. Premonition dreams for instance how can you explain those. Science can't explain quantum entanglement but acknowledge its existence because of facts. I bet you they won't be able to explain it without​ spirituality​. To me quantum entanglement is the same thing that happens in telepathic human brains. What links the particles is the living force of the universe, some call it the spirit of God. The Force that went from creating the big bang to providing with necessary ingredients that allow the evolution we have today. So...prove to me that there isn't something behind the equilibrium we have in this universe today. I don't wanna confuse you. To me the world wasn't built in 7days. It evolved. Humans and apes are different species. Humans did evolve but they have always had an intelligence that distinguish them from apes.

@StrictLoving: In order to be ignorant you have to deny fact.
Religion and fact rarely mix because you can't prove any of it.

@Picklebobble2: Watch "Patterns of Evidence" on Netflix.

@StrictLoving: And why would I do that ?
A television programme will suddenly prove the existence of God ???
You have to admit, there are a lot of unknowns here !
Several books, all said to be the word of (pick the God of your choice !)God. All written by folk who used the language of their time. All professing miracles; pestilence and characters that you have to admit are....larger than life !
And big errors too !
If you want physical evidence to ensure proof (since that's largely how it's done !) why were ALL the rules as to how to live life, given to one man ?
How do you account for factual creatures like Dinosaurs but can't for things like Angels or any other 'other worldly' entity in a holy book ?

@Peekaboo: Ok

@dunpender: dunpender come on old chap, you know very well no one can , you and me
😉

@lockedupforgood: said the bowl of petunias ...