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

[Rasta]

That was not a straw-man argument.

You've already demonstrated your lack of knowledge when it comes to fallacies, so it is no surprise that you do not reckognize the strawman fallacy when you see it.

lol, Atheists only claim knowledge "when" they have it? So there are times they do not have knowledge.

Of course. I've never claimed to know everything.

That is kind of odd. Don't you think?

Not at all.

If there was not GOD, then Atheists would have to come from a random set of processes that are made from chemical reactions. If this is true, then our brain is made up of these chemical reactions by random processes therefore we can conclude that atheists do not even know if they are even here or if they ask the right questions to people because it is just a random process.

Non sequiter. (look it up if you have to)

The reason it cannot be un-caused because there was first an effect.

Why is that?

You show him a claim that you have no basis for so why ask? Also, you ask him if he can see that, but you cannot see the illogical fallacies of inconsistency within the evolutionary worldview that is based upon the assumptions of scientists not "facts"

*sigh* Repeating yourself over and over again does not make your argument magically more solid. This has been explained to you before.

 

[PT Calvinist]

Moving on?

 

[Rasta]

1. I never said I was right Rasta. The BIBLE is right.

You know this is an opinion right?

2.You are assuming that i do not check out the stuff you all post. Well, yeah I do actually.

It doesn't show.

"The facts of evolution................." site is totally unreliable. It is out to date information, I found one claim that was claimed back in 1979. Now how reliable is that?

You are all over the place. Are older claims less reliable than new claims? What does that say about the Bible?

After all the years of evidence being found? Evolutionary theory changes according to the evidences found. But the Bible does not. Another inconsistency.

LOL!! This is a strength, not a weakness. The ability to adapt in face of new facts and evidence is science's strongest quality.

Note just because the words that come from scientists does not mean what they say is true. They do not know the past, they were not there to see it. No one in the world was there to see it. But yet again whenever I use this principle it goes right over your head. I will be proving some things in about weeks time.

It does not go over my head at all. Your position is mind numbingly simple to understand. Your reasoning is baseless, and without merit.

You said you used to believe and used to be a christian, well if you now believe there is no GOD then you were never a christian anyway.

No True Scottsman fallacy. (look it up if you have to)

 

[Rasta]

Moving on?

What else would you like to discuss related to: "good reasons for being an atheist"?

 

[PT Calvinist]

What else would you like to discuss related to: "good reasons for being an atheist"?

Do you believe Atheism is as close to the truth as it gets?

 

[Isambard]

Dictionary.com

fal⋅la⋅cy

   /ˈfæl

ə

si/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [fal-uh-see] Show IPA Use Fallacy in a Sentence

–noun, plural -cies. 1. a deceptive, misleading, or false notion, belief, etc.: That the world is flat was at one time a popular fallacy. 2. a misleading or unsound argument. 3. deceptive, misleading, or false nature; erroneousness. 4. Logic. any of various types of erroneous reasoning that render arguments logically unsound. 5. Obsolete. deception.
A misconception is the same thing as "misleading". I know what a fallacy is Isambard.

First fail.

"Specific sense in logic dates from 1552." Wow, you didn't even read your own source.

I can careless what fallacy it is, but I know it is the biggest fallacy believed in the world today.

Oops, your ignorance is showing.

You are wrong, scientists are now figuring out that whenever you take evidence and look at through the biblical creation worldview it makes sense and lines up with the bible.

Considering you've effectively waved away all sources produced (all of them by scientists), I find this statement hilarious and wrong.

You said I do not even knwo whats in my scriptures. Well, that is where you are assuming that I have read the whole bible and know everything there is in it, therefore you cannot make such a claim. You have not learned "everything" about evolution there is to be. Your assuming this which makes it wrong.

LOL. Wait wait, you were lecturing me on how I dont know about creationism and the bible, and yet you have yet to finish reading the bible?! LOLOLOLOL.

As per your faulty comparison, I won't even bother going into how its a non-sequituir given your track record of simply re-asserting already discredited claims.

You say my questions are ignorant rants according to you and your evolutionary worldview, because you know you cannot give a logical explanation for such claims that evolutionists make without being irrational and inconsistent within a worldview because it is based upon the assumptions of scientists who were not there.

Holy run on sentences batman! And wait, didn't you just appeal to scientists a few paragraphs ago? lol

But my basis are truly account of your ignorance, according to 2 Peter 3:3-7. it says people are willingly ignorant of these things just like you all are being.

A book talking about unicorns, dragons, and magic says I'm denying "the truth (TM)" to follow my own evil desires. I think I'd be more effected if Frodo chastized me. I at least liked the fantasy elements in LotR

You say i contradict myself, but I am really suprised at how faulty your reasoning skills are because if you had good logical interpretation of words you would know that I do not contradict myelf, because if you have ever heard of "sarcasm" then you would know that I do not. I was showing the absurdity of evolution.

A full stop or period (.) (sometimes stop, full point, or dot) is the punctuation mark commonly placed at the end of several different types of sentences in English and many other languages. A full stop consists of a small dot placed at the end of a line of text, such as at the end of a sentence.
Full stop - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Sixth Fail.

You say plants have life, but they do not.

"The Hebrew word nephesh chayyah—it’s referring to living souls, and the Bible doesn’t apply that to plants. Plants you can think of as biological machines. They’re not alive in a biblical sense, animals are and human beings are." -- Jason Lisle (AiG)

Wow....
Well, this gem is going on fstds. But tell me, are bacteria and fungi considered non-living too? Neither contain blood either.

<snipped>

Another ignorant rant, how droll.

 

[Isambard]

Do you believe Atheism is as close to the truth as it gets?

Truth in relation to what? Don't tell you don't know what atheism is either...uggg.

 

[Rasta]

Do you believe Atheism is as close to the truth as it gets?

When I think of truth, I think of knowledge. The position of atheism has nothing to do with knowledge, only belief. Do I believe I'm right? Yes I do.

Understanding science is as close to truth as we get. You guys do yourself a disservice if you deny science or aspects of science.

 

[Isambard]

First I'd like to say you are beyond help..you might as well claim you don't even exist with the logic you use...

You mean Occam's Razor and proper as well as consistant use of scientific models and theories?

The point of my posts wasn't to show whether or not Atheism can offer us anything on existence. It can't..it can only offer us ignorance and guesses.

Atheism is not a; philosophy, ideology, or positive statement. By definition it can't offer anything then just a lack of belief in little purple flying toads offers nothing either.

As for what brought God into existence...The answer is simple Nothing brought Him into existence...He has always existed. He is the uncaused cause. Now just take a momment to think about it. YOU CANNOT HAVE An infinete regression of causes..it's like having an infinite amount of dominos falling one after another. If you go back infinetly in time to try and find the first domino that started it all. ...you'd NEVER find it. Because..you'd have to cross an infinite amount of time to get to that which is impossible to do. It also means, that you can't have an infinite regression of causes. Furthermore, this would mean that there would never be a first cause. If there is no first cause, then there can't be a second or a third and so on. And you wouldn't have any of them falling at all. But since they are falling there had to be a first cause...that itself...was un-caused...that started the whole thing moving at a specific time in the past.

Awsome. So you're relying on special-pleading then eh?

So it is with the universe, it was caused to exist at a specific point in time. The un-caused cause is God, who decided to create the universe and who, as the Bible says in psalm 90:2, "is from everlasting to everlasting"

As my previous replies to you have demonstrated (if you bothered actually reading them), positing your God as a first-cause is superflous.

 

[PT Calvinist]

In your view...why is the rape of a 7-year old girl wrong?

 

[Isambard]

In your view...why is the rape of a 7-year old girl wrong?

She hasn't, nor can she, give consent.

 

[PT Calvinist]

She hasn't, nor can she, give consent.

You can't answer the question...you and me both know this. What approach is this?

 

[Rasta]

You can't answer the question...you and me both know this. What approach is this?

The question was answered. You asked why it is wrong. Rape is easy. It implies that it is against the will of an individual. We are individuals and can relate to having our will violated. Nobody wants their will violated.

 

[WingsOfEagles07]

You know this is an opinion right?



It doesn't show.



You are all over the place. Are older claims less reliable than new claims? What does that say about the Bible?



LOL!! This is a strength, not a weakness. The ability to adapt in face of new facts and evidence is science's strongest quality.



It does not go over my head at all. Your position is mind numbingly simple to understand. Your reasoning is baseless, and without merit.



No True Scottsman fallacy. (look it up if you have to)

No it is not an opinion it is right because what you deny of creation the Bible says people will do near the end days. Your inknowledgable of the Bible and its Truth.

I do not have to answer according to your folly and evolutionist's folly.

This does not say anything about the Bible. I mean it has been here since the beginning of Creation. John 1:3-4. And the thing is, It has still stood all those years. You all still cannot say there is no GOD full 100% proof. Why? Because the Bible states what you all do is wrong, Like I said before, I have proved on just "some" things of how evolution is wrong. The Bible predicts this happening and it is being fulfilled right now. But evolution does not prove jack squat to anyone.

So if you all obtain evidence that the 'BB' did not happen this is a Strength? Okay, seems like a very illogical assumption.

You say it is easy to understand and has not gone over your heads(Isambard,Rasta). Well, according to the statements you all have made pertaining to my statements, you all do not even by the slightest get my point in any way whatsoever. You all end up making senseless ignorant statements and questions that do not even cover the point of my statement. But you all get them alright. ?!?!?

No, this is not a "No True Scotsman Fallacy" ..yet again if evolutionists and atheists were not ignorant to the Bible and what it says therein, It would be simple and reasonable enough to make a claim like that if you all understood the Bible the way "actual" christians view it. Plus, I have already proved this before but yet again was refused by the evolutionists who claim evolution to be "fact" whenever it is not, and in a few weeks, I will be able to show you how. After this Friday, I will no longer post on this thread until I have this ready. You all say that I have faulty reasoning and logic, but you all do not even see the inconsistency of your illogical reasoning of presuppositions, like I have once again proved before but refused to answer my question(s).

 

[PT Calvinist]

The question was answered. You asked why it is wrong. Rape is easy. It implies that it is against the will of an individual. We are individuals and can relate to having our will violated. Nobody wants their will violated.

What do you base your morals and ethics on?

 

[WingsOfEagles07]

The question was answered. You asked why it is wrong. Rape is easy. It implies that it is against the will of an individual. We are individuals and can relate to having our will violated. Nobody wants their will violated.

OR DO THEY? YOU HAVE NO IDEA.

 

[Isambard]

You can't answer the question...you and me both know this. What approach is this?

I did answer your question, you simply chose to ignore it. The basis is social contract theory.

 

[Rasta]

What do you base your morals and ethics on?

I think we've covered this ground already. It is based on the collective good of human society and reckognizing ourselves as a member of that collective.

 

[PT Calvinist]

I think we've covered this ground already. It is based on the collective good of human society and reckognizing ourselves as a member of that collective.

What religion would you choose to adhere to if you wanted to?

 

[Isambard]

What religion would you choose to adhere to if you wanted to?

Whichever one could provide a shred of objective empirical evidence to support its theology.