Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Nope. Define it how you like.Dear Hitch, thanks, you have come up.
Now, we will ask each other a question each, and see where it will get us.
Here is my question to you, Do you have at all any information at all of a description of God, gods, goddesses, deities, divinities?
I cannot speak for HitchSlap, only for myself.Dear Hitch, you have no idea of any information of concepts of God, gods, goddesses, deities, divinities at all?
What then are you doing here in this thread where I find you to be professing that you are both an agnostic and an atheist?
This thread is about How to prove God exists.
So, you are conducting yourself in an irrational and un-intelligent manner.
What do you say?
I say you haven't provided one shred of evidence or even a cogent argument, for that matter. Now quit wasting our time and step-up, or admit you've got nothing.Dear Hitch, you have no idea of any information of concepts of God, gods, goddesses, deities, divinities at all?
What then are you doing here in this thread where I find you to be professing that you are both an agnostic and an atheist?
This thread is about How to prove God exists.
So, you are conducting yourself in an irrational and un-intelligent manner.
What do you say?
Sure. Go on- get to it.Dear Hitch, the trouble is before we can do anything of rational and intelligent exchange we have got to concur on preliminary things, like that for example, The default status of things in the totality of reality is existence.
Now, you say you have no idea at all on God, god, goddesses, deities, divinities, so you are conducting yourself in an irrational and un-intelligent manner.
I guess you just write here to waste the time of posters here, like myself, for from my part I am keen to examine how you think at all, in case there is something rational and intelligent from your heart and mind.
But I am now almost sure that you are completely into contrived irrationality and un-intelligence, just to feel yourself to be so smart with your kind of self-embraced absurd behavior.
Anyway, prescinding from God, etc., let us go into this statement, "The default status of things in the totality of reality is existence," what do you say about the statement, namely: first, do you understand it or not?
Not me-YOU FOLKS make it sound that way via attribution of reasoning characteristics to mindless chemicals,.
Intelligent" DNA helps repair cell damage and prevent tumors
"Intelligent" DNA helps repair cell damage and prevent tumors | Genetic Literacy Project
Yeah, that's what happens when you get your science from JOURNALISTS, not scientists.
Atheist journalists.Yeah, that's what happens when you get your science from JOURNALISTS, not scientists.
If that is just Pachomius-word-salad-talk for "'existent' and 'real' can be used as synonyms"... yes, I would concur. I do have some objections to your phrasing, but as you have already explained that criticism of your position will be considered "bereft of reason", I won't insist on these.The default status of things in the totality of reality is existence.
And addressing all atheists who do accept that the default status of things in the totality of existence, please also give your comments.
That's a reasonable view.For whatever it's worth to you, I lean toward abiogenesis myself, but I don't rule out panspermia either. I have no problem whatsoever with life forming 'naturally', nor do I "hold belief" that abiogensis theory somehow precludes 'intelligent design'.
I still recognize that my preference for abiogenesis is a 'cause of the gaps' argument to some degree.
38 minutes ago #671
Okay, Hitch, that is very good, you and I we concur that the default status of things in the totality of reality is existence.
That concurrence has within its cognitive substance the proof of God existing, in concept as first and foremost the creator cause and operator cause of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.
What do you say? Please give your comments.
And addressing all atheists who do accept that the default status of things in the totality of existence, please also give your comments.
If you do not concur, please bear with me, I will not interact with you, because I see you to be bereft of reason.
For those who do concur, please bring forth your comments, but remember that as you concur, so you must have seen it to be rational that the default status of things in the totality of reality is existence.
Wherefore continue to act rational and intelligent, do not relapse again into inconsistency and incoherency with your heart and mind, as to expose yourselves in the core, to be irrational nad un-intelligent.
I already presented you with a rational and, I hope, intelligently formulated explanation why your "proof by babies" doesn't work.
Dear atheist colleagues here:
You see, we have got to concur on preliminary things at all, otherwise we are into nonsense interaction, because it is talking past each other’s head, and that is irrational, un-intelligent, and a waste of time.
Now, allow me to recall that I have thought that with the what I might call atheists of intellectual sobriety (but they turned out to have changed already as of at this point in time), we have concurred on the following:
1. In your intellectually sober moments you admit that you cannot prove God does not exist, you have doubts - although in words and acts your mark yourselves off as militant atheists.
2. You concur with me on the information of God, as in concept first and foremost the creator cause and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.
3. You concur with me that we both are into the search for evidence on God, from my part to be existing, from your part to be not existing.
4. We will go forth into the objective world outside of our mind to search for evidence, again from my part on God existing, and from your part on God not existing.
5. And we will in our search for evidence use the information as guide or as good road map, on the concept of God, namely, in concept first and foremost God is the creator cause and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.
So, dear atheist colleagues, tell me which items above you now no longer agree with me on.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?