Discussion:
A SUMMARY OF ATHEISM
Add Reply
Viktor Tandofsky
2020-07-17 20:05:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Here is a summary of atheism: Demand evidence of God, even tho He is strictly a matter of faith and His existence has never been and will never be proven or disproven. (atheists like to waste time)
Viktor Tandofsky
2020-07-17 20:07:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Viktor Tandofsky
Here is a summary of atheism: Demand evidence of God, even tho He is strictly a matter of faith and His existence has never been and will never be proven or disproven. (atheists like to waste time)

Michael Cole
2020-07-17 20:26:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Viktor Tandofsky
Post by Viktor Tandofsky
Here is a summary of atheism: Demand evidence of God, even tho He is strictly a matter of faith and His existence has never been and will never be proven or disproven. (atheists like to waste time)
http://youtu.be/U40OIESDwlU
What would you think of a scientist whose attitude about a hard scientific question for which evidence was lacking was "I'll choose to believe whatever I want and I'll believe it through an act of faith"? You would probably think that is a very STUPID way to approach science, or any other discipline that attempts to ascertain facts. If an historian studies ancient Middle Eastern history and can't find evidence to shed light on the causes of some war between the Hittites and Assyrians, you would think that person was a very STUPID historian if the person said, "I'll choose among one of my speculations and decide to believe it through a process of faith."

When evidence is lacking, there is nothing wrong with speculation as long as one is clear that it is speculation only and could be wrong. So if we agree that believing things through "faith" is a STUPID way to approach questions of fact, be they scientific, historical, or whatever, why would that be a good way to approach fundamental questions about the nature of the reality and the origin of the universe? Faith is a psychological phenomenon only. It has no more epistemological relevance than the sensation of having an itch.
aaa
2020-07-18 12:03:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Friday, July 17, 2020 at 4:07:14 PM UTC-4, Viktor Tandofsky
Post by Viktor Tandofsky
Post by Viktor Tandofsky
Here is a summary of atheism: Demand evidence of God, even tho He
is strictly a matter of faith and His existence has never been
and will never be proven or disproven. (atheists like to waste
time)
http://youtu.be/U40OIESDwlU
What would you think of a scientist whose attitude about a hard
scientific question for which evidence was lacking was "I'll choose
to believe whatever I want and I'll believe it through an act of
faith"?
A scientist needs faith too. Faith is the foundation of science. Such
foundation is otherwise known as axiom.

You would probably think that is a very STUPID way to
approach science, or any other discipline that attempts to ascertain
facts. If an historian studies ancient Middle Eastern history and
can't find evidence to shed light on the causes of some war between
the Hittites and Assyrians, you would think that person was a very
STUPID historian if the person said, "I'll choose among one of my
speculations and decide to believe it through a process of faith."
When evidence is lacking, there is nothing wrong with speculation as
long as one is clear that it is speculation only and could be wrong.
So if we agree that believing things through "faith" is a STUPID way
to approach questions of fact, be they scientific, historical, or
whatever, why would that be a good way to approach fundamental
questions about the nature of the reality and the origin of the
universe? Faith is a psychological phenomenon only. It has no more
epistemological relevance than the sensation of having an itch.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.

God's spiritual evidence is evident in everyone.
Find it and treasure it because it's the covenant of God.
It's the reason why we are given this life on earth.
It's the foundation why we can have meaning in life.

Let's all honor our personal spiritual evidence of God for the sake of
Christ!
Michael Cole
2020-07-18 18:04:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by aaa
Post by Michael Cole
Post by Viktor Tandofsky
Post by Viktor Tandofsky
Here is a summary of atheism: Demand evidence of God, even tho He
is strictly a matter of faith and His existence has never been
and will never be proven or disproven. (atheists like to waste
time)
http://youtu.be/U40OIESDwlU
What would you think of a scientist whose attitude about a hard
scientific question for which evidence was lacking was "I'll choose
to believe whatever I want and I'll believe it through an act of
faith"?
A scientist needs faith too. Faith is the foundation of science. Such
foundation is otherwise known as axiom.
That is absurd. Science is not axiomatic like mathematics. If you just mean that science requires working assumptions such as conservation of momentum that is true, but scientists believe well established principles like that because centuries of evidence confirms them. Science is different then math. In math, if your logic is correct your math is correct. But in science there is a real world which is the ultimate judge of your theory. A clever, very logical theory simply has to be discarded if nature doesn't do that, but does something different.
Post by aaa
You would probably think that is a very STUPID way to
Post by Michael Cole
approach science, or any other discipline that attempts to ascertain
facts. If an historian studies ancient Middle Eastern history and
can't find evidence to shed light on the causes of some war between
the Hittites and Assyrians, you would think that person was a very
STUPID historian if the person said, "I'll choose among one of my
speculations and decide to believe it through a process of faith."
When evidence is lacking, there is nothing wrong with speculation as
long as one is clear that it is speculation only and could be wrong.
So if we agree that believing things through "faith" is a STUPID way
to approach questions of fact, be they scientific, historical, or
whatever, why would that be a good way to approach fundamental
questions about the nature of the reality and the origin of the
universe? Faith is a psychological phenomenon only. It has no more
epistemological relevance than the sensation of having an itch.
--
Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
God's spiritual evidence is evident in everyone.
Find it and treasure it because it's the covenant of God.
It's the reason why we are given this life on earth.
It's the foundation why we can have meaning in life.
Let's all honor our personal spiritual evidence of God for the sake of
Christ!
Spiritual evidence is a joke. If a scientist at a conference proposed a scientific theory without evidence, but asked the audience to contemplate the spiritual aspects of the theory, the scientist would be laughed out of the room and rightly so. Spirituality, whatever exactly that is, is just a human emotional experience. It has no bearing on factual questions of what is true and false and what is real and what is unreal. Feeling spiritual is like feeling itchy. It it is just a sensation with no epistemological content.
%
2020-07-18 18:10:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Michael Cole
Post by aaa
Post by Michael Cole
Post by Viktor Tandofsky
Post by Viktor Tandofsky
Here is a summary of atheism: Demand evidence of God, even tho He
is strictly a matter of faith and His existence has never been
and will never be proven or disproven. (atheists like to waste
time)
http://youtu.be/U40OIESDwlU
What would you think of a scientist whose attitude about a hard
scientific question for which evidence was lacking was "I'll choose
to believe whatever I want and I'll believe it through an act of
faith"?
A scientist needs faith too. Faith is the foundation of science. Such
foundation is otherwise known as axiom.
That is absurd. Science is not axiomatic like mathematics. If you just mean that science requires working assumptions such as conservation of momentum that is true, but scientists believe well established principles like that because centuries of evidence confirms them. Science is different then math. In math, if your logic is correct your math is correct. But in science there is a real world which is the ultimate judge of your theory. A clever, very logical theory simply has to be discarded if nature doesn't do that, but does something different.
Post by aaa
You would probably think that is a very STUPID way to
Post by Michael Cole
approach science, or any other discipline that attempts to ascertain
facts. If an historian studies ancient Middle Eastern history and
can't find evidence to shed light on the causes of some war between
the Hittites and Assyrians, you would think that person was a very
STUPID historian if the person said, "I'll choose among one of my
speculations and decide to believe it through a process of faith."
When evidence is lacking, there is nothing wrong with speculation as
long as one is clear that it is speculation only and could be wrong.
So if we agree that believing things through "faith" is a STUPID way
to approach questions of fact, be they scientific, historical, or
whatever, why would that be a good way to approach fundamental
questions about the nature of the reality and the origin of the
universe? Faith is a psychological phenomenon only. It has no more
epistemological relevance than the sensation of having an itch.
--
Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
God's spiritual evidence is evident in everyone.
Find it and treasure it because it's the covenant of God.
It's the reason why we are given this life on earth.
It's the foundation why we can have meaning in life.
Let's all honor our personal spiritual evidence of God for the sake of
Christ!
Spiritual evidence is a joke. If a scientist at a conference proposed a scientific theory without evidence, but asked the audience to contemplate the spiritual aspects of the theory, the scientist would be laughed out of the room and rightly so. Spirituality, whatever exactly that is, is just a human emotional experience. It has no bearing on factual questions of what is true and false and what is real and what is unreal. Feeling spiritual is like feeling itchy. It it is just a sensation with no epistemological content.
so is atheism , in fact it has no proof of anything ,
it doesn't even have proof you can say no too ,
atheism is like a phantom pain your leg has been removed ,
but your toe is itchy
Michael Cole
2020-07-18 18:18:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by %
Post by Michael Cole
Post by aaa
Post by Michael Cole
Post by Viktor Tandofsky
Post by Viktor Tandofsky
Here is a summary of atheism: Demand evidence of God, even tho He
is strictly a matter of faith and His existence has never been
and will never be proven or disproven. (atheists like to waste
time)
http://youtu.be/U40OIESDwlU
What would you think of a scientist whose attitude about a hard
scientific question for which evidence was lacking was "I'll choose
to believe whatever I want and I'll believe it through an act of
faith"?
A scientist needs faith too. Faith is the foundation of science. Such
foundation is otherwise known as axiom.
That is absurd. Science is not axiomatic like mathematics. If you just mean that science requires working assumptions such as conservation of momentum that is true, but scientists believe well established principles like that because centuries of evidence confirms them. Science is different then math. In math, if your logic is correct your math is correct. But in science there is a real world which is the ultimate judge of your theory. A clever, very logical theory simply has to be discarded if nature doesn't do that, but does something different.
Post by aaa
You would probably think that is a very STUPID way to
Post by Michael Cole
approach science, or any other discipline that attempts to ascertain
facts. If an historian studies ancient Middle Eastern history and
can't find evidence to shed light on the causes of some war between
the Hittites and Assyrians, you would think that person was a very
STUPID historian if the person said, "I'll choose among one of my
speculations and decide to believe it through a process of faith."
When evidence is lacking, there is nothing wrong with speculation as
long as one is clear that it is speculation only and could be wrong.
So if we agree that believing things through "faith" is a STUPID way
to approach questions of fact, be they scientific, historical, or
whatever, why would that be a good way to approach fundamental
questions about the nature of the reality and the origin of the
universe? Faith is a psychological phenomenon only. It has no more
epistemological relevance than the sensation of having an itch.
--
Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
God's spiritual evidence is evident in everyone.
Find it and treasure it because it's the covenant of God.
It's the reason why we are given this life on earth.
It's the foundation why we can have meaning in life.
Let's all honor our personal spiritual evidence of God for the sake of
Christ!
Spiritual evidence is a joke. If a scientist at a conference proposed a scientific theory without evidence, but asked the audience to contemplate the spiritual aspects of the theory, the scientist would be laughed out of the room and rightly so. Spirituality, whatever exactly that is, is just a human emotional experience. It has no bearing on factual questions of what is true and false and what is real and what is unreal. Feeling spiritual is like feeling itchy. It it is just a sensation with no epistemological content.
so is atheism , in fact it has no proof of anything ,
it doesn't even have proof you can say no too ,
atheism is like a phantom pain your leg has been removed ,
but your toe is itchy
Must I repeat the tiresome argument that one can't "prove" a negative? I can't prove there is no God and you can't prove that there does not exist a purple giraffe named Herman that inhabits a planet orbiting Alpha Centauri. That doesn't mean that reason has no bearing on the existence or nonexistence of that entity, or that faith is a way to resolve the question.
%
2020-07-18 18:57:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Michael Cole
Post by %
Post by Michael Cole
Post by aaa
Post by Michael Cole
Post by Viktor Tandofsky
Post by Viktor Tandofsky
Here is a summary of atheism: Demand evidence of God, even tho He
is strictly a matter of faith and His existence has never been
and will never be proven or disproven. (atheists like to waste
time)
http://youtu.be/U40OIESDwlU
What would you think of a scientist whose attitude about a hard
scientific question for which evidence was lacking was "I'll choose
to believe whatever I want and I'll believe it through an act of
faith"?
A scientist needs faith too. Faith is the foundation of science. Such
foundation is otherwise known as axiom.
That is absurd. Science is not axiomatic like mathematics. If you just mean that science requires working assumptions such as conservation of momentum that is true, but scientists believe well established principles like that because centuries of evidence confirms them. Science is different then math. In math, if your logic is correct your math is correct. But in science there is a real world which is the ultimate judge of your theory. A clever, very logical theory simply has to be discarded if nature doesn't do that, but does something different.
Post by aaa
You would probably think that is a very STUPID way to
Post by Michael Cole
approach science, or any other discipline that attempts to ascertain
facts. If an historian studies ancient Middle Eastern history and
can't find evidence to shed light on the causes of some war between
the Hittites and Assyrians, you would think that person was a very
STUPID historian if the person said, "I'll choose among one of my
speculations and decide to believe it through a process of faith."
When evidence is lacking, there is nothing wrong with speculation as
long as one is clear that it is speculation only and could be wrong.
So if we agree that believing things through "faith" is a STUPID way
to approach questions of fact, be they scientific, historical, or
whatever, why would that be a good way to approach fundamental
questions about the nature of the reality and the origin of the
universe? Faith is a psychological phenomenon only. It has no more
epistemological relevance than the sensation of having an itch.
--
Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
God's spiritual evidence is evident in everyone.
Find it and treasure it because it's the covenant of God.
It's the reason why we are given this life on earth.
It's the foundation why we can have meaning in life.
Let's all honor our personal spiritual evidence of God for the sake of
Christ!
Spiritual evidence is a joke. If a scientist at a conference proposed a scientific theory without evidence, but asked the audience to contemplate the spiritual aspects of the theory, the scientist would be laughed out of the room and rightly so. Spirituality, whatever exactly that is, is just a human emotional experience. It has no bearing on factual questions of what is true and false and what is real and what is unreal. Feeling spiritual is like feeling itchy. It it is just a sensation with no epistemological content.
so is atheism , in fact it has no proof of anything ,
it doesn't even have proof you can say no too ,
atheism is like a phantom pain your leg has been removed ,
but your toe is itchy
Must I repeat the tiresome argument that one can't "prove" a negative? I can't prove there is no God and you can't prove that there does not exist a purple giraffe named Herman that inhabits a planet orbiting Alpha Centauri. That doesn't mean that reason has no bearing on the existence or nonexistence of that entity, or that faith is a way to resolve the question.
i can prove anything you want proof of god i have it right here come and
see it , if you don't come it means you know there is a god and you just
want to troll
Davej
2020-07-18 18:55:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by %
[...]Spirituality, whatever exactly that is, is just a
human emotional experience. It has no bearing on factual
questions of what is true and false and what is real and
what is unreal. Feeling spiritual is like feeling itchy.
It it is just a sensation with no epistemological content.
so is atheism , in fact it has no proof of anything ,
it doesn't even have proof you can say no too ,
atheism is like a phantom pain your leg has been removed ,
but your toe is itchy
Theism says "Worship the invisible Giant Holy rabbit."

Atheism says "What rabbit?"
%
2020-07-18 18:59:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Davej
Post by %
[...]Spirituality, whatever exactly that is, is just a
human emotional experience. It has no bearing on factual
questions of what is true and false and what is real and
what is unreal. Feeling spiritual is like feeling itchy.
It it is just a sensation with no epistemological content.
so is atheism , in fact it has no proof of anything ,
it doesn't even have proof you can say no too ,
atheism is like a phantom pain your leg has been removed ,
but your toe is itchy
Theism says "Worship the invisible Giant Holy rabbit."
Atheism says "What rabbit?"
no they don't they go into a giant caniption about what artie is doing
Davej
2020-07-17 20:42:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Viktor Tandofsky
Here is a summary of atheism: Demand evidence of God, even tho
He is strictly a matter of faith and His existence has never
been and will never be proven or disproven. (atheists like
to waste time)
Here is a summary of atheism: religious kooks constantly show up and
demand that you disprove their foolish beliefs. How exactly do you
prove to someone that a giant invisible, undetectable rabbit doesn't
exist? So then then return day after day ranting on and on about
their giant invisible rabbit friend.
Tim
2020-07-18 17:39:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Viktor Tandofsky
Post by Viktor Tandofsky
Here is a summary of atheism: Demand evidence of God, even tho He is strictly a matter of faith and His existence has never been and will never be proven or disproven. (atheists like to waste time)
http://youtu.be/U40OIESDwlU
Theists like to waste their minds believing in things for which they have no evidence. And, of course, that is a complete waste of time.
%
2020-07-18 17:45:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tim
Post by Viktor Tandofsky
Post by Viktor Tandofsky
Here is a summary of atheism: Demand evidence of God, even tho He is strictly a matter of faith and His existence has never been and will never be proven or disproven. (atheists like to waste time)
http://youtu.be/U40OIESDwlU
Theists like to waste their minds believing in things for which they have no evidence. And, of course, that is a complete waste of time.
and atheists like to waste there time wondering what theists are doing ,
and you'll notice they can't prove theists are wrong
LinuxGal
2020-07-18 00:12:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Viktor Tandofsky
Here is a summary of atheism: Demand evidence of God, even
tho He is strictly a matter of faith and His existence has
never been and will never be proven or disproven.
Epicurus already disproved God long ago:

Is God unwilling to prevent evil from occuring in the world?
Then why call him good?

Is God willing to prevent evil from occuring in the world,
but unable? Then why call him God?
--
Linux Geeks: Smart. Single. Sexy.
Well, two out of three ain't bad!

https://twitter.com/LinuxGal
aaa
2020-07-18 12:17:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Viktor Tandofsky
Here is a summary of atheism: Demand evidence of God, even tho He is
strictly a matter of faith and His existence has never been and will
never be proven or disproven.
Is God unwilling to prevent evil from occuring in the world? Then why
call him good?
Is God willing to prevent evil from occuring in the world, but unable?
Then why call him God?
God is both willing and able, but people are unable to believe in God
due to their lack of faith in God. That is why.

In this world, no one can murder another person without murdering the
spirit of God in his or her own heart in the first place. Evil only runs
amok because Christ is still nailed on the cross. We will not see the
end of evil unless we have the spirit of Christ resurrected from within
ourselves.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.

God's spiritual evidence is evident in everyone.
Find it and treasure it because it's the covenant of God.
It's the reason why we are given this life on earth.
It's the foundation why we can have meaning in life.

Let's all honor our personal spiritual evidence of God for the sake of
Christ!
LinuxGal
2020-07-18 17:29:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Viktor Tandofsky
Here is a summary of atheism: Demand evidence of God, even tho He is
strictly a matter of faith and His existence has never been and will
never be proven or disproven.
Is God unwilling to prevent evil from occuring in the world? Then why
call him good?
Is God willing to prevent evil from occuring in the world, but unable?
Then why call him God?
God is both willing and able, but people are unable to believe in God due to
their lack of faith in God. That is why.
That's what I thought. God only helps those who help
themselves. He's on the side with the biggest artillery.
--
Linux Geeks: Smart. Single. Sexy.
Well, two out of three ain't bad!

https://twitter.com/LinuxGal
%
2020-07-18 17:37:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by aaa
Post by Viktor Tandofsky
Here is a summary of atheism: Demand evidence of God, even tho He is
strictly a matter of faith and His existence has never been and will
never be proven or disproven.
Is God unwilling to prevent evil from occuring in the world? Then why
call him good?
Is God willing to prevent evil from occuring in the world, but unable?
Then why call him God?
God is both willing and able, but people are unable to believe in God
due to their lack of faith in God. That is why.
That's what I thought.  God only helps those who help themselves.  He's
on the side with the biggest artillery.
and then one day you die
Mitchell Holman
2020-07-18 18:14:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by aaa
Post by Viktor Tandofsky
Here is a summary of atheism: Demand evidence of God, even tho He is
strictly a matter of faith and His existence has never been and will
never be proven or disproven.
Is God unwilling to prevent evil from occuring in the world? Then why
call him good?
Is God willing to prevent evil from occuring in the world, but unable?
Then why call him God?
God is both willing and able, but people are unable to believe in God
due to their lack of faith in God. That is why.
In this world, no one can murder another person without murdering the
spirit of God in his or her own heart in the first place.
When god murders people does he also
murder "the spirit of god"?
%
2020-07-18 18:55:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Viktor Tandofsky
Here is a summary of atheism: Demand evidence of God, even tho He is
strictly a matter of faith and His existence has never been and will
never be proven or disproven.
Is God unwilling to prevent evil from occuring in the world? Then why
call him good?
Is God willing to prevent evil from occuring in the world, but unable?
Then why call him God?
God is both willing and able, but people are unable to believe in God
due to their lack of faith in God. That is why.
In this world, no one can murder another person without murdering the
spirit of God in his or her own heart in the first place.
When god murders people does he also
murder "the spirit of god"?
not as long as you keep living
Vincent Maycock
2020-07-18 19:30:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by aaa
Post by Viktor Tandofsky
Here is a summary of atheism: Demand evidence of God, even tho He is
strictly a matter of faith and His existence has never been and will
never be proven or disproven.
Is God unwilling to prevent evil from occuring in the world? Then why
call him good?
Is God willing to prevent evil from occuring in the world, but unable?
Then why call him God?
God is both willing and able, but people are unable to believe in God
due to their lack of faith in God. That is why.
So why couldn't God provide them with that faith?
Post by aaa
In this world, no one can murder another person without murdering the
spirit of God in his or her own heart in the first place. Evil only runs
amok because Christ is still nailed on the cross.
What keeps him nailed up there?
Post by aaa
We will not see the
end of evil unless we have the spirit of Christ resurrected from within
ourselves.
So why doesn't God resurrect Christ from within us?

Loading...