Good reason to be an atheist?(moved from Christian Appologetics)

[Rasta]

If you only have two possibilities to account for something and one of them is negated, the other is validated and you do not need to prove it is true. It is true by default.

Yes.

 

[Isambard]

All of that creationists do, because all knowledge comes from the preconditions of Intelligibility. Without them there would be no science or knowledge and only a biblical creation worldview does it make sense.

Oh, so what you really meant was that creationism wasn't based on any science. Gotcha.

Oh and about the dragons, again I already know about that one. It is not addressing fantasy dragons. Like I said if you understood the Bible and creation you would already know that it is not fantasy animals it is talking about. Telling me this shows me you know nothing about it.

Now where does it use magic?

This of course begs the question, where are these "non-fantasy" dragons and unicorns? As for the magic, see what I quoted from Lev.

 

[PT Calvinist]

Yes.

Do you agree with the following?

Logic is the mental process of proper inference.

Logical Absolutes are the undergirding foundations of logical processes. Such Logical Absolutes are:

Law of Identity: Something is what it is. Something that exists has a specific nature.

Law of Non-Contradiction: Something cannot be its self and not itself at the same time in the same way and in the same sense.

Law of Excluded Middle: a statement is either true or false.
​

 

[Isambard]

Do you agree with the following?

Logic is the mental process of proper inference.

Logical Absolutes are the undergirding foundations of logical processes. Such Logical Absolutes are:

Law of Identity: Something is what it is. Something that exists has a specific nature.

Law of Non-Contradiction: Something cannot be its self and not itself at the same time in the same way and in the same sense.

Law of Excluded Middle: a statement is either true or false.
​

Yes.

 

[Rasta]

Logic is the mental process of proper inference.

Yes, as we define it.

Law of Identity: Something is what it is. Something that exists has a specific nature.

Yes.

Law of Non-Contradiction: Something cannot be its self and not itself at the same time in the same way and in the same sense.

Yes.

Law of Excluded Middle: a statement is either true or false.

No. Statements can be partially true or partially false, or neither true or false depending on the context.

 

[WingsOfEagles07]

Another No True Scottsman Fallacy. You sure are racking up your fallacy count today.

I'll try to talk with real simple words, so I do not loose you.

1. Creationists say that the earth is young. This is obviously false. We have many very accurate methods to determine the age of the earth. It is billions of years old. That means the earth is not young and creationists are wrong.

2. Creationists deny the facts of evolution, and pretend it is a matter of opinion. It is not a matter of opinion. The facts of evolution have been well established for many years. Our fossile record is excellent. We are able to map the genome (DNA) and trace the origins of every living creature on the face of the planet. That includes you.

3. Creationism relies soley on circular reasoning. The basis they use to justify their belief, is their belief. There are no facts that support the creationist world view. Only opinions and rhetoric. Circular reasoning (look it up if you need to) is a poor form of reasoning.

4. Creationists think that dinosaurs existed at the same time as man. This is obviously false. The geological record shows that the existence of humans and dinosaurs are separated by millions of years.

That should be enough for now. I may have used some words that are too big, but let me know if you don't understand something.

""" 1. Creationists say that the earth is young. This is obviously false. We have many very accurate methods to determine the age of the earth. It is billions of years old. That means the earth is not young and creationists are wrong. """

False. You said "We" you mean actual scientists not you. There are many methods for a young earth like the magnetic field of the earth and many more. These methods are also not accurate as it seems. How do you personally know this? By reading up on it?

""" 2. Creationists deny the facts of evolution, and pretend it is a matter of opinion. It is not a matter of opinion. The facts of evolution have been well established for many years. Our fossile record is excellent. We are able to map the genome (DNA) and trace the origins of every living creature on the face of the planet. That includes you. """

"Facts" you mean "assumptions". It actually is a matter of opinion. An every creature... Really? Where did dinosaurs come from? And what did they evolve from? You need to study up more about the fossil record and how it cannot account for millions of years.

#3 on your list. Is reversed around.
#4 is also disproved by the Bible and by science already. You need to stay updated.

 

[Rasta]

False. You said "We" you mean actual scientists not you. There are many methods for a young earth like the magnetic field of the earth and many more. These methods are also not accurate as it seems. How do you personally know this? By reading up on it?

By we, I mean human beings. How are they not accurate? Yes, I know this because I educate myself.

"Facts" you mean "assumptions".

No. I mean facts.

It actually is a matter of opinion.

No it's not. It is a fact of reality.

An every creature... Really? Where did dinosaurs come from? And what did they evolve from? You need to study up more about the fossil record and how it cannot account for millions of years.

You do, obviously. Evolution of the dinosaurs

#3 on your list. Is reversed around.

Thanks for proving my point.

#4 is also disproved by the Bible and by science already. You need to stay updated.

See exactly. No facts to back up your claims. Only opinions and baseless rhetoric.

 

[PT Calvinist]

No. Statements can be partially true or partially false, or neither true or false depending on the context.

Then you're not a strong Atheist right?

 

[WingsOfEagles07]

Oh, so what you really meant was that creationism wasn't based on any science. Gotcha.


This of course begs the question, where are these "non-fantasy" dragons and unicorns? As for the magic, see what I quoted from Lev.

Oh my gosh, ISAMBARD can you not understand what I am saying? I did not say that creationism was not based on science. Did you not see what I read? I mean it is RIGHT THERE.

And you have to be specific when saying Leviticus. Chapter? Verse?

The unicorn

For the dragon part. Why don't you try something new and try to figure it out. =]

 

[WingsOfEagles07]

Yes, as we define it.



Yes.



Yes.



No. Statements can be partially true or partially false, or neither true or false depending on the context.

LOL, Isambard and Rasta just agreed with an inconsistency of evolution.

 

[TerranceL]

Really? You think that is possible. Haha. You are very wrong Terrance.Your "facts" prove nothing to creationists because our "facts" already said you will deny three major of our "facts" and you know what? Our "facts" were correct because you all do deny three major things of the Biblical creation worldview. You cannot base your "facts" and say our "facts" is wrong because your so-called "facts" has a foundation on which it has no basis for because all it is, is assumptions by scientists who were not there. But our "facts" are true facts because they come true. The Bible says many things that you do not understand so you cannot say our facts are wrong because you know nothing of creation. Oh since the Bible facts "have been shown false". Why is the predicted in the Bible and its coming true?

Our facts are based upon observable reality, yours are based upon the scribblings of primitives.

 

[TerranceL]

Atheists have the inability to account for our own existence.

That's called honest, you see it's better to be honest and say "I don't know" than to make something up and claim divine intervention where there is no evidence for such.

Now...we exist, that's obvious and though Atheists appeal to evolution, evolution isn't the issue here. Instead, we need to go way back and ask. "Where did the universe come from?" You see, whatever has come into existence was caused to come into existence by something else.

Proof?

As you well know, there are only two possibilites to account for the universe. An impersonal cause, and a personal cause. This pair exhausts all possibilities, it is either one or the other, there is no third option.

When you close your mind there are no options...

Your option (as an atheist) is the impersonal cause, one of them being that the universe brought itself into existence then of course that would be illogical. Since something that does not exist has no nature and with no nature, there are no attributes, and with no attributes....Actions can't be performed, such as bringing itself into existence.

And yet I see lots of scientific papers on the begining of the universe written by scientists and none written by creationist. If you have such "logic" why don't you get busy and write a paper to be peer reviewed?

The other impersonal cause would be for you (the atheist) to say that the Universe always existed. That dosen't work either...because that would mean that the universe is/was infinitly old. Here's the problem...if it is infinitley old....why hasn't it run out of usable energy by now? As the second law of Thermodynamics would state. Also, in order to get to the present in an infinetly old universe...and infinite amount of time would have to be crossed. But it is impossible to cross an infinite amount of time to get to now. This would also mean, that there cannot be an infinite amount of past cycles of the universe where it expands and contracts forever. So this explanation can't work.

So the idea that something always existed only works for you god huh?

Special pleading.

 

[TerranceL]

It's certainly been fun..

You consider asking questions and ignoring or not understand the answers then proclaiming you are right, "fun"?

Interesting.

 

[TerranceL]

besides that.....what "IF" the Bible where true?

Then you would have some evidence for it.

 

[Isambard]

Oh my gosh, ISAMBARD can you not understand what I am saying? I did not say that creationism was not based on science. Did you not see what I read? I mean it is RIGHT THERE.

I asked you to name one science creationism was consistant with. You named none.

And you have to be specific when saying Leviticus. Chapter? Verse?

Re-read my replies.

The unicorn

Aurochs had two horns. Nice try though.

For the dragon part. Why don't you try something new and try to figure it out. =]

Sorry. I don't take fantasy as real. Either you produce a dragon, or admit you effectively trying to rationalize a myth

 

[WingsOfEagles07]

I asked you to name one science creationism was consistant with. You named none.


Re-read my replies.


Aurochs had two horns. Nice try though.


Sorry. I don't take fantasy as real. Either you produce a dragon, or admit you effectively trying to rationalize a myth

Re-read it again. The creation site.
Your statement about fantasy, you illogical conscience proves you have no capability to understanding the creatures of the Bible.

 

[WingsOfEagles07]

Then you would have some evidence for it.

Okay, Evidence. 2 Peter 3:3-7 descibes Evolutionists.
They deny three things.

1.God created the world.
2. God judged the world by Noah's flood.
3. God is going to judge this world again but by fire.

This is proof, because evolutionists do just the thing.

 

[SuperPhil]

Okay, Evidence. 2 Peter 3:3-7 descibes Evolutionists.
They deny three things.

1.God created the world.
2. God judged the world by Noah's flood.
3. God is going to judge this world again but by fire.

This is proof, because evolutionists do just the thing.

It's amazing that you have stuck with these people for so long! I'm impressed by your perseverance! So I want to encourage you to keep it up!

12 For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.


You are not battling against them, but against satan - the Father of all lies!

 

[Isambard]

Re-read it again.

Which part? It simply says unicorns exist. Never providing evidence, then shoe-horning the Auroch.

Your statement about fantasy, you illogical conscience proves you have no capability to understanding the creatures of the Bible.

Yayaya-weee-wow!

 

[WingsOfEagles07]

Which part? It simply says unicorns exist. Never providing evidence, then shoe-horning the Auroch.



Yayaya-weee-wow!

I'm not going to talk to such childish nonsense anymore. You just do not get it.