[PERMANENTLY CLOSED] A question for those who.....

[DogmaHunter]

Do you mind if i question your beliefs?

No. But apparantly the OP does.

 

[brinny]

Exactly.

Now connect the dots in light of this thread.

DogmaHunter said:
Because others have rights and freedoms to.

Exactly.

It would behoove one to keep that in mind before deciding to smack another upside the head then, wouldn't it?

Thank you kindly.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Who are you to stop someone from doing what is meaningful to them?

That wouldn't be stopping someone from doing what is meaningful to them. They would continue to do so, but the meanings would be different ones. At no time is anyone prevented from doing anything meaningful to them.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[anonymous person]

No. But apparantly the OP does.

If you find meaning in life by questioning my beliefs have at it. Allow others the same courtesy though.

 

[Freodin]

I am a little confused here.

Anonymous person, can you provide some examples of people wanting "to deny Christians the right to follow the examples of Jesus and His disciples"?

 

[paulm50]

Who are you to stop someone from doing what is meaningful to them?

You don't sound very tolerant.

Would you stop someone being a Scientologists, Muslim, Branch Davidian, Nazi?

Believe in whatever you want to. Question my beliefs, I won't stop you physically. I will answer and, in print, try to convert others to the real truth. The one with evidence.

 

[anonymous person]

Would you stop someone being a Scientologists, Muslim, Branch Davidian, Nazi?

Believe in whatever you want to. Question my beliefs, I won't stop you physically. I will answer and, in print, try to convert others to the real truth. The one with evidence.

The real truth?

What is the real truth?

 

[anonymous person]

I am a little confused here.

Anonymous person, can you provide some examples of people wanting "to deny Christians the right to follow the examples of Jesus and His disciples"?

You will remain confused.

 

[asherahSamaria]

You will remain confused.

So you don't have a response then?

No one is stopping you believing whatever you want to. No one can anyway. But your right to act on those beliefs stops when it interferes with someone elses rights to their beliefs. It's that simple.

 

[Chany]

If you find meaning in life by questioning my beliefs have at it. Allow others the same courtesy though.

Okay...?

You think most of us oppose being asked questions and challenged in our beliefs?

 

[brinny]

Would you stop someone being a Scientologists, Muslim, Branch Davidian, Nazi?

Believe in whatever you want to. Question my beliefs, I won't stop you physically. I will answer and, in print, try to convert others to the real truth. The one with evidence.

Exactly. You understand perfectly when others do the same then?

Thank you kindly.

 

[Poster0]

As i was reading the thread i wanted to share my own beliefs. Science only proves how foolish we humans are. If God doesn't exist then where did we come from? Did our consciousness just come into existence without a beginning? Can something come from nothing? No and science proves this. Science proves that something had to exist before we did. Something had to exist which lead up to the big bang. Newtons law of motion proves that the big bang had to have an origin. It didn't just create itself.

Law of motion number one: an object either remains at rest or continues to move at a constant velocity, unless acted upon by an external force.

You see. science proves that an external force created the big bang. That force was God Himself.

You may disagree and say that God didn't create the big bang but you must agree (if you are scientific) that something did create it. So i'll post a question that will leave us with only one answer.

What came first? What created the big bang? and what created that which created the big bang? Something had to be at the very beginning. For something to be at the very beginning, then that thing itself had to be without beginning. However, how can something have no beginning? The answer is that only the supreme being can have no beginning. It is a living being like ourselves because the law of motion proves that we cannot be greater than what created us. Has anyone ever created perpetual motion? No. Look around this world of science. Look at the energy problems that man is forever trying to solve. Science proves God exists, but its in a state of denial. Whatever created us had to either be first, or come from whatever was first. We are talking about perpetual motion, or perpetual energy that science itself says is impossible, yet without it we cannot possibly exist. Therefore science must yield itself to the fact that God is that perpetual energy that came from the beginning, and that we are just men who cannot possibly comprehend, let alone create anything as supreme as perpetual energy. The beginning is the supreme being. Science not only denies God, but it denies itself at the same time. If God doesn't exist, then science doesn't exist either. We cannot possibly prove that God doesn't exist, and to suggest otherwise is not logical or scientific.

 

[asherahSamaria]

As i was reading the thread i wanted to share my own beliefs. Science only proves how foolish we humans are. If God doesn't exist then where did we come from? Did our consciousness just come into existence without a beginning? Can something come from nothing? No and science proves this. Science proves that something had to exist before we did. Something had to exist which lead up to the big bang. Newtons law of motion proves that the big bang had to have an origin. It didn't just create itself.

Law of motion number one: an object either remains at rest or continues to move at a constant velocity, unless acted upon by an external force.

You see. science proves that an external force created the big bang. That force was God Himself.

You may disagree and say that God didn't create the big bang but you must agree (if you are scientific) that something did create it. So i'll post a question that will leave us with only one answer.

What came first? What created the big bang? and what created that which created the big bang? Something had to be at the very beginning. For something to be at the very beginning, then that thing itself had to be without beginning. However, how can something have no beginning? The answer is that only the supreme being can have no beginning. It is a living being like ourselves because the law of motion proves that we cannot be greater than what created us. Has anyone ever created perpetual motion? No. Look around this world of science. Look at the energy problems that man is forever trying to solve. Science proves God exists, but its in a state of denial. Whatever created us had to either be first, or come from whatever was first. We are talking about perpetual motion, or perpetual energy that science itself says is impossible, yet without it we cannot possibly exist. Therefore science must yield itself to the fact that God is that perpetual energy that came from the beginning, and that we are just men who cannot possibly comprehend, let alone create anything as supreme as perpetual energy. The beginning is the supreme being. Science not only denies God, but it denies itself at the same time. If God doesn't exist, then science doesn't exist either. We cannot possibly prove that God doesn't exist, and to suggest otherwise is not logical or scientific.

Please look up the meaning of "special pleading".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_pleading
http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/index.php/logical-fallacies/164-special-pleading

I've even given you a couple of links.

 

[brinny]

As i was reading the thread i wanted to share my own beliefs. Science only proves how foolish we humans are. If God doesn't exist then where did we come from? Did our consciousness just come into existence without a beginning? Can something come from nothing? No and science proves this. Science proves that something had to exist before we did. Something had to exist which lead up to the big bang. Newtons law of motion proves that the big bang had to have an origin. It didn't just create itself.

Law of motion number one: an object either remains at rest or continues to move at a constant velocity, unless acted upon by an external force.

You see. science proves that an external force created the big bang. That force was God Himself.

You may disagree and say that God didn't create the big bang but you must agree (if you are scientific) that something did create it. So i'll post a question that will leave us with only one answer.

What came first? What created the big bang? and what created that which created the big bang? Something had to be at the very beginning. For something to be at the very beginning, then that thing itself had to be without beginning. However, how can something have no beginning? The answer is that only the supreme being can have no beginning. It is a living being like ourselves because the law of motion proves that we cannot be greater than what created us. Has anyone ever created perpetual motion? No. Look around this world of science. Look at the energy problems that man is forever trying to solve. Science proves God exists, but its in a state of denial. Whatever created us had to either be first, or come from whatever was first. We are talking about perpetual motion, or perpetual energy that science itself says is impossible, yet without it we cannot possibly exist. Therefore science must yield itself to the fact that God is that perpetual energy that came from the beginning, and that we are just men who cannot possibly comprehend, let alone create anything as supreme as perpetual energy. The beginning is the supreme being. Science not only denies God, but it denies itself at the same time. If God doesn't exist, then science doesn't exist either. We cannot possibly prove that God doesn't exist, and to suggest otherwise is not logical or scientific.

excellent questions.

Thank you kindly.

 

[Freodin]

As i was reading the thread i wanted to share my own beliefs.

***snip***

If we were to point out now that this is off-topic for the thread, would that count that as "denying Christians the right to follow the examples of Jesus and His disciples"?

 

[Poster0]

Please look up the meaning of "special pleading".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_pleading
http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/index.php/logical-fallacies/164-special-pleading

I've even given you a couple of links.

From your link:

Description: Applying standards, principles, and/or rules to other people or circumstances, while making oneself or certain circumstances exempt from the same critical criteria, without providing adequate justification. Special pleading is often a result of strong emotional beliefs that interfere with reason.


I haven't exempted myself. I said that we humans are foolish, and i am surely among the human race. I have denied God many times by going through life with no acknowledgment of his existence. Perhaps its those who would deny Gods existence who are not using logic and reasoning, but are instead motivated by strong emotional beliefs that interfere with reason. I have only showed that God is scientifically proven. I see no fault with my theory, it seems completely proven scientifically.

 

[Poster0]

excellent questions.

Thank you kindly.

Thank you, you're welcome.

 

[Poster0]

If we were to point out now that this is off-topic for the thread, would that count that as "denying Christians the right to follow the examples of Jesus and His disciples"?

Technically any Christian opinion in this thread can be said to be off topic because the OP's question was posed to Atheists, as far as i can tell. However my post was both a response to something the OP said (believe that meaning and purpose are determined by each human being) and it was also a response to the comments by other posters. I'm not sure how its off topic, but i don't really have any more to say about it anyway. I just wanted to share my opinion, i'm not looking for a debate.

 

[asherahSamaria]

From your link:

Description: Applying standards, principles, and/or rules to other people or circumstances, while making oneself or certain circumstances exempt from the same critical criteria, without providing adequate justification. Special pleading is often a result of strong emotional beliefs that interfere with reason.


I haven't exempted myself. I said that we humans are foolish, and i am surely among the human race. I have denied God many times by going through life with no acknowledgment of his existence. Perhaps its those who would deny Gods existence who are not using logic and reasoning, but are instead motivated by strong emotional beliefs that interfere with reason. I have only showed that God is scientifically proven. I see no fault with my theory, it seems completely proven scientifically.

I actually consider humans to be quite smart.

Special pleading is when you say that everything has to have a creator, except the creator itself because that's your special belief that you need to be true to justify your beliefs.. That's a perfect example of special pleading.


"Perhaps its those who would deny Gods existence who are not using logic and reasoning, but are instead motivated by strong emotional beliefs that interfere with reason" - That's a weak deist argument - not a Christian one . Because then we get into which god or gods? Do you deny Krishna? What about denying inter dimensional universe creating pixies - no deity at all needed there. Are you using strong emotional beliefs to deny their existence? How does your theory discount their existence?

 

[GrimKingGrim]

Do you mind if i question your beliefs?

Thank you kindly.

Go ahead.