To prove God not existing, atheists conflate God with invisible unicorns.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sarkus said:
Then there is nothing to say that God is not as fictitious as unicorns or the celestial teapot, other than your confidence in what you admit to yourself you can not grasp.
Furthermore, you claim that the "Creator's angels visited the fleshly birth of the Christ, but never now", yet what do you have in support of that claim? Other than the veracity of the Bible which is the question in hand, and so can not be assumed.
Click to expand...
All things which compete with the written evidences of a "Creator" is atheistic itself. The Bible may be similar in other scripts of mythology but if you solely investigate the writings of its different authors, they never contradict. They will only contradict if your thoughts are already full of contradictions. I never claim, I cited the events written by the Gospel writers. In support? You research the writings of Tacitus and Josephus. There are theists who don't question the veracity of the Biblical accounts, but many of them [not Bible believers] don't fully believe the Biblical accounts.
Sarkus said:
You are claiming. You do so even now with your claim of "Biblical truths", and you do it in your statement above regarding the "Creator's angels".
Click to expand...
Truths to me may be lies to you and vice-versa. I don't insist that you accept that there are angelic/spiritual beings. I stated here because the creation myths of other surrounding peoples during Moses' time lacked any stories about angelic beings.
Sarkus said:
And you also seem to be claiming that notions other than the Creation story are "evil angelic stories"?
Click to expand...
Evil, in the sense, that these fallen angels had revealed stories of which stories they didn't have any part of the "Great Flood" stories.
Sarkus said:
All I see here is someone believing the Bible with nothing outside of the Bible to support their beliefs.
Click to expand...
Nothing outside? The universe is the widest evidence of a "Creator." Your cell is also an evidence that there is a "Creator." Atheists are also evidences.
 
kerux said:
Theists shall always exist and their opposite atheists shall always exist as long as this earth is still but on that Judgment Day atheists shall witness whether they are right or whether they are wrong.
Click to expand...
Oh look, you managed to quote my post while simultaneously avoiding the point of that post AND making unsupported assertions.
 
kerux said:
All things which compete with the written evidences of a "Creator" is atheistic itself. The Bible may be similar in other scripts of mythology but if you solely investigate the writings of its different authors, they never contradict. They will only contradict if your thoughts are already full of contradictions. I never claim, I cited the events written by the Gospel writers. In support? You research the writings of Tacitus and Josephus. There are theists who don't question the veracity of the Biblical accounts, but many of them [not Bible believers] don't fully believe the Biblical accounts.
Click to expand...
Lack of contradiction is not evidence of veracity. After all, the writings regarding the Roman gods do not contradict, at least as far as I am aware.
And please understand that if you cite events written in the Gospels as true then you are making a claim as to their veracity.
Tacitus and Josephus merely write that someone referred to as Christ was crucified. How does that support everything else in the Bible, least of all the actual existence of God?
Truths to me may be lies to you and vice-versa. I don't insist that you accept that there are angelic/spiritual beings. I stated here because the creation myths of other surrounding peoples during Moses' time lacked any stories about angelic beings.
Click to expand...
Which does nothing to address the issue, that you make claims and do not support them.
Evil, in the sense, that these fallen angels had revealed stories of which stories they didn't have any part of the "Great Flood" stories.
Click to expand...
:confused:
Nothing outside? The universe is the widest evidence of a "Creator." Your cell is also an evidence that there is a "Creator." Atheists are also evidences.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:
I think rebuttal to this point has been done to death in this thread alone, and I for one have little intention of repeating it.
 
kerux said:
Theists shall always exist and their opposite atheists shall always exist as long as this earth is still but on that Judgment Day atheists shall witness whether they are right or whether they are wrong.
Click to expand...
So it's possible on judgement day that atheists will be proven right?
 
kerux said:
Remains to be? It had been demonstrated a long time ago. Many atheists when bedridden still were agnostic and finally said a little prayer to their self-version of a god/powerful spirit, lol. What a shame! Anyway, there really were true atheists until death.
In your mind, they are rational, but actually very irrational and erratic. Why should someone who never acknowledge a super-power argue that superpower? Or maybe, the very real situation is this: some atheists just challenge that "Spirit" to confront them. hehe. Very childish!
No agnostics contradict the teachings of gnostics and they successfully persuaded the "doubters."
Not solely on my opinion, there are plenty of authors who seemed to be atheists but actually a believer of a "Creator" like Charles Darwin. Even Dawkins admit that "he can be wrong"? In that statement alone, any atheist can be wrong for him. Lol. Atheists should insist certainty that really their beliefs are truthful! Theists, on the other hand, insist even to the extent that they killed each other. True Christians don't butcher human beings.
Click to expand...
Lack of certainty is a strength of our position, not a weakness. I doubt your claim that atheists in general lose their atheism when dying.
 
spidergoat said:
Lack of certainty is a strength of our position, not a weakness. I doubt your claim that atheists in general lose their atheism when dying.
Click to expand...

Then exercise that strength by declaring uncertainty as to whether they lose their atheism when dying.
 
kerux said:
FAME - this is what these atheist authors and defenders are actually craving for. They want to eradicate any known beliefs or myths about a creator. hehe. I notice the ending in a series of mythology, in a movie, and television episodes, by the slaying of one of the important gods of ancient greek mythology and what a surprise, it's a work of atheists. Although I agree with that idea, the end of myths, but I insist in this web, not only here in this fora, the survival of the Bible until Judgment comes. Remember the burning of one of the translators of the earliest Bible? It's not a work of a God-fearing human being but a work of a nonbeliever, merciless and satanic atheist, who appeared to be an advocate of theism.
Click to expand...
Not sure you understand the difference between a belief and a myth. Myths are fine, they are recognized as fiction. Beliefs can be harmful if they are based on fiction.

Note, atheists don't believe in Satan, either.
 
Dear readers here, please pay close attention to this exchange I am having with Sarkus


From Pachomius
Okay, please Sarkus, are you advocating the proposition that everything with a beginning need not have a cause?

From Sarkus
No. I'm saying I don't know whether it is true or not that everything with a beginning need have a cause.
​
Please Sarkus, rewrite your statement above.

Here is your statement from above,

No. I'm saying I don't know whether it is true or not that everything with a beginning need have a cause.
​
and I will disassemble it into its components:

(1) No
(2) I'm not saying
(3) I don't know
(4) whether it is true
(5) or not
(6) that everything with a beginning need have a cause.
​
You remember in our previous exchange of which the present one is the resumption, I told you that you are into verbosity in aid of vain pomposity.
​
I have to tell you that now you are into verbosity in aid of obfuscation.​
 
Let's be clear, all causes happen in a universe with time and space already existing in which actions can occur. So any cause would require a universe as a prerequisite.

You can see the problem there.
 
Pachomius said:
I have to tell you that now you are into verbosity in aid of obfuscation.
Click to expand...
You're having difficulty with the English language apparently.
To mistake a clear and very carefully qualified statement with "verbosity" and "obfuscation" says much about your reasoning capabilities.
 
Pachomius, what is your issue here? Why are you struggling with understanding what I wrote?

To be clear: I am not making any claim on the issue, because I do not know what the truth of the matter is. I can neither support one side nor the other. You, on the other hand, have made a claim. I have asked you to support that claim. You have yet to do so.

What is more, you "disassemble it into components" and get (2) incorrect.

So what is your problem with understanding? Why are you struggling with what is a fairly basic sentence?

You then resort once again to unwarranted yet wonderfully ironic personal attacks. To what end?
 
Dear Sarkus, in our preceding exchange on the same theme of everything with a beginning has a cause, you said that my statement is only a claim.

I like us to resume your statement that my statement everything with a beginning has a cause is just a claim.

You bring in that word claim to describe my statement, everything with a beginning has a cause, please enlighten readers starting with myself, what do you understand by your use of the word claim?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top