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.
Come join us.And so does 7+ billion other people. So?
Even a fictional character as I have pointed out is evidence of a real person or character.
It does, it is about the terribly weak evidence you present here for your "God".You really think your straw man address the point I made?
Just children's stories, allegories and such. It works for many...except for those who were never allowed to play as a child, sadly.Really, do you have anything of significance?
Here, in a sciences forum? Perhaps you would have better luck in the Exploring Christianity forum.Just children's stories, allegories and such.
Batteries low again? That accuracy of that thing is really poor.It works for many...except for those who were never allowed to play as a child, sadly.
Christians make claims that the supernatural produces effects in the natural world. That puts the supernatural squarely into the realm of science. They claim that there is evidence for separate creation, a young created Earth, and a recent global flood. The miracles described in the Bible would be easily detected by science. What you claim is clearly false.I just did. Again, it is because science can only detect those things produced within the natural realm (the product, not the source), because it can't see beyond its own realm.
Demonstrate? If I demonstrate something where I am, you cannot see it...because you are not here. I am.
No, the universe is God-centric, with a human benefit, a gift really.
Look, it's a mermaid on Mars! Or is that Bigfoot?
Atheism is a theological position on the existence of deities.
Why must you always conflate them with astrophysicists,
or imply that mainstream cosmology is incompatible with beliefs in gods, even the Christian God?
Godchecker lists over 4000 individual gods, goddesses and spirits from around the world:
"Reject" implies intent. Believe is not conscious choice.
What I am skeptical of is the reasons provided (or not provided) for why one should believe in such things.
No, just your silly application of it.Still ridiculing pattern recognition as a part of science are you? How predictable.
You've misrepresented the scientific method from day one, so why should you start representing it accurately now?
You did it right there.Ok.
I don't. I just note that atheists tend to misrepresent the scientific method <snip>
"I received your letter of June 10th. I have never talked to a Jesuit priest in my life and I am astonished by the audacity to tell such lies about me. From the viewpoint of a Jesuit priest I am, of course, and have always been an atheist." - Albert Einstein, letter to Guy H. Raner Jr, July 2, 1945, responding to a rumor that a Jesuit priest had caused Einstein to convert from atheism.Since I don't believe that cosmology is incompatible with the concept of God (nor did Einstein)
You do each time to use the word "atheist" in relation with astrophysics, or anything else that is not specifically on the theological position on the existence of deities., I don't imply any such thing.
Ultimately, what is the difference?Apparently you've never learned the meaning of the term 'monotheism'. The term implies there is but one God, and many *religions*. You willfully misrepresent a 'religion' as a 'god'.
No, just your silly application of it.
Cool. For the next three days, decide to completely accept modern cosmology, and that gods are simply characters in books. then switch back, if you can. Let me know when this happens.False. Both rejection of an idea and "belief" in an idea are conscious choices.
Which makes it a conscious choice, and a subjective one at that.
Ultimately, what is the difference?
You did it right there.
"I received your letter of June 10th. I have never talked to a Jesuit priest in my life and I am astonished by the audacity to tell such lies about me. From the viewpoint of a Jesuit priest I am, of course, and have always been an atheist." - Albert Einstein, letter to Guy H. Raner Jr, July 2, 1945, responding to a rumor that a Jesuit priest had caused Einstein to convert from atheism.
Add that to your signature.
"My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble minds. That deeply emotional conviction of the presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my idea of God."
You do each time to use the word "atheist" in relation with astrophysics, or anything else that is not specifically on the theological position on the existence of deities.
Considering it to be of scientific significance is.There is nothing silly about noting that our universe contains features, mass layouts and functional similarities to living and intelligent organisms.
My reaction is only an echo of that of the bulk of the scientific community. Convince them, and get back to me.Your personal reaction is the silly part.
To be intellectually honest, one would have to admit there are no gods, in the context of a proper sciences forum. They are only hypothetical. All we have to work with are religions.The difference is intellectual honesty. There are various opinions about the current President of the US, but the variations in belief do not demonstrate the existence of multiple individuals.
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?