The origins of atheism

[As I was saying]

As long as we are repeating...that just means you are convinced by the dream (the illusion) of a world which is not what it seems.

I just answered life's biggest question: What is life all about? ...and you just reverted back to your dream state.

Life is about...waking up from the illusion.

That is right Scott. I have asked numerous atheists to tell me how life began and to date, zilch, zero, nothing. In other words they don't know.

 

[As I was saying]

I wonder if the below ever happens?

"You mean ... something bad is going to happen to me if I do not believe in (your version of) the Christian God?

Oh, no!

You've convinced me."

What version of the Christian God would you like to understand or comprehend?

 

[David Colin Gould]

That is right Scott. I have asked numerous atheists to tell me how life began and to date, zilch, zero, nothing. In other words they don't know.

I am happy to say that I don't know. And?

 

[David Colin Gould]

What version of the Christian God would you like to understand or comprehend?

Preferably a version with some evidence to support its existence. That would be a novelty.

 

[As I was saying]

That includes the demi-god SATAN. We don't believe in any of it. We sure aren't busy with satanic activities.

Ha ha. O to be in denial. Jesus said he came to give life. Satan seeks to steal, kill and destroy and he is doing a good job murdering millions of babies in the womb thanks to the survival of the fittest ideology of atheism.

 

[As I was saying]

Ana1 doesn't know when/how the world began. Surprise. Surprise. I thought atheists knew everything as this quote suggests.....

“Scientism is not the same thing as science. Science is a blessing, but scientism is a curse. Science, I mean what practicing scientists actually do, is acutely and admirably aware of its limits, and humbly admits to the provisional character of its conclusions; but scientism is dogmatic, and peddles certainties. It is always at the ready with the solution to every problem, because it believes that the solution to every problem is a scientific one, and so it gives scientific answers to non-scientific questions. Owing to its preference for totalistic explanation, scientism transforms science into an ideology, which is of course a betrayal of the experimental and empirical spirit.”

Leon Wieseltier, Perhaps Culture is Now the Counterculture: A Defense of the Humanities, 19 May 2013; www.newrepublic.com/article/113299/leon-wieseltier-commencement-speech-brandeis-university-2013 [Wieseltier self-describes as a humanist.]

For your information, I know when/how it began....

In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.....Genesis 1.

 

[HitchSlap]

That is right Scott. I have asked numerous atheists to tell me how life began and to date, zilch, zero, nothing. In other words they don't know.

We don't know how life began. Only difference with you is, we don't make stuff up.

 

[As I was saying]

I am happy to say that I don't know. And?

If you don't know, why is it that you deem that no one else knows.

 

[As I was saying]

We don't know how life began. Only difference with you is, we don't make stuff up.

If you don't know, how do you know that no one else does?

 

[As I was saying]

Preferably a version with some evidence to support its existence. That would be a novelty.

And what evidence do you want?

 

[David Colin Gould]

If you don't know, why is it that you deem that no one else knows.

I don't 'deem' that no-one else knows. It is just that no-one who I have spoken to has been able to convince me that they know. They generally just quote from some religious text or other.

 

[David Colin Gould]

And what evidence do you want?

What evidence have you got?

 

[Davian]

I wonder if the below ever happens?

"You mean ... something bad is going to happen to me if I do not believe in (your version of) the Christian God?

Oh, no!

You've convinced me."

Only in their dreams, and for the plot for the sequel to the "God's not Dead" movie.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2528814/

 

[As I was saying]

I don't 'deem' that no-one else knows. It is just that no-one who I have spoken to has been able to convince me that they know. They generally just quote from some religious text or other.

Yes you do because you have made it clear from your comments here that you know everything and we know nothing. And, faith is the evidence...of things not seen. Because you live in a natural world that cannot comprehend the supernatural, you are up the creek without a paddle because you do not have the tools or comprehension to work out how the supernatural works. All you do is give your opinion about it and that could not be further from the truth as evidenced by what you say.

And no, they do not quote some religious text as you so quaintly put it. They usually quote the word of God. In your cynicism you are totally unable to comprehend the import of what the word of God says but I have noticed that you like to give the impression you are an expert on it.

All you seem to do is give a purely natural reasoning for whatever is being discussed and as a result you miss completely what God is really saying so your understanding is bereft of any knowledge. As the scriptures say...the NATURAL man CANNOT discern the things of the spirit. CANNOT David please note. That means anything you say about the word of God is WRONG.

 

[Davian]

...

For your information, I know when/how it began....

In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.....Genesis 1.

...then God [allegedly] walked and talked in a garden that has no evidence of having existed, poofed people and animals into existence, and later, in a manner contrary to the modern understanding of genetics, populated the planet with a tiny group of individuals and animals that survived a global flood in an unbuildable boat, a flood that killed the dinosaurs in a manner that only *appears* to be 65 million years ago, because the Earth is really only somehow 6000 years old, yet remains, by every object measure to date indistinguishable from nothing.

Is that accurate?

 

[As I was saying]

What evidence have you got?

Depends on what evidence you want. I have given evidence, even to the point of SEEING a miracle happen, but I was told in no uncertain terms seeing a miracle is not evidence.

 

[David Colin Gould]

Yes you do because you have made it clear from your comments here that you know everything and we know nothing.

Yes, I have made that pretty clear ...

And, faith is the evidence...of things not seen. Because you live in a natural world that cannot comprehend the supernatural, you are up the creek without a paddle because you do not have the tools or comprehension to work out how the supernatural works. All you do is give your opinion about it and that could not be further from the truth as evidenced by what you say.

And no, they do not quote some religious text as you so quaintly put it. They usually quote the word of God. In your cynicism you are totally unable to comprehend the import of what the word of God says but I have noticed that you like to give the impression you are an expert on it.

All you seem to do is give a purely natural reasoning for whatever is being discussed and as a result you miss completely what God is really saying so your understanding is bereft of any knowledge. As the scriptures say...the NATURAL man CANNOT discern the things of the spirit. CANNOT David please note. That means anything you say about the word of God is WRONG.

If I "CANNOT" discern things of the spirit, then we are at an impasse.

 

[David Colin Gould]

Depends on what evidence you want. I have given evidence, even to the point of SEEING a miracle happen, but I was told in no uncertain terms seeing a miracle is not evidence.

You seeing a miracle happen may be evidence for you. It is not evidence for me, partly because I did not see it and partly because miracles are not explicitly linked to sources of miracles.

 

[As I was saying]

...then God [allegedly] walked and talked in a garden that has no evidence of having existed, poofed people and animals into existence, and later, in a manner contrary to the modern understanding of genetics, populated the planet with a tiny group of individuals and animals that survived a global flood in an unbuildable boat, a flood that killed the dinosaurs in a manner that only *appears* to be 65 million years ago, because the Earth is really only somehow 6000 years old, yet remains, by every object measure to date indistinguishable from nothing.

Is that accurate?

Just a thought, according to atheists, an amoeba appeared out of a pond and became a....and that became a......and that became a........and that became a.....and that became a......and so on and so forth and then one day that became a human.

The Bible and its literal interpretation have played a vital role in the development of Western science Peter Harrison. Andreas Idreos Professor of Science and Religion at the University of Oxford,
Fellow of Harris Manchester College

It is commonly supposed that when in the early modern period individuals began to look at the world in a different way, they could no longer believe what they read in the Bible. In this book I shall suggest that the reverse is the case: that when in the sixteenth century people began to read the Bible in a different way, they found themselves forced to jettison traditional conceptions of the world.

Had it not been for the rise of the literal interpretation of the Bible and the subsequent appropriation of biblical narratives by early modern scientists, modern science may not have arisen at all. In sum, the Bible and its literal interpretation have played a vital role in the development of Western science.

 

[As I was saying]

Yes, I have made that pretty clear ...

If I "CANNOT" discern things of the spirit, then we are at an impasse.

And as it has been said pride goes before a fall as NO ONE knows everything and NO ONE is totally devoid of knowledge so it is all in your mind dear boy.

And yes we are at an impasse as I cannot stoop down to your level and you cannot rise to mine.