Non sequitur
Wokest Bae Of The Forum
- Jul 2, 2011
- 4,532
- 541
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Constitution
Upvote
0
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.
What if the outcome wasn't good?Yes.
Since you knew the outcome would be good, you'd be at least as accountable as him for the good outcome. You get credit for putting him in the situation and he gets credit for making good choices.
I never said that, anywhere.You said you knew it was good, so if it turns out to be bad then I'd know you were wrong.
But you are making the future set in stone contingent on God knowing. Seems you are contradicting yourself a bit there.
I never said that, anywhere.
Even though I set the stage, and know what will happen, I anticipate a good outcome!
Our own will is not able to make decisions about the future.
Good point.I have evidence that you did say it:
You said you know what will happen and anticipate a good outcome, which clearly implies you know the outcome will be good. Maybe you misspoke.
How does that follow from what I said?
You concluded that 'something' is forcing us to make decisions and I'm just suggesting that 'something' is our own will. Besides, we can make decisions based on what we think will happen in the future.
But atheism has one fatal flaw. It assumes that the sum total of reality is what can be detected by the senses. Drop this assumption and the "magic" of miracles appears, the "pink unicorns" disappear, and the Creator God can become known.
But atheism has one fatal flaw. It assumes that the sum total of reality is what can be detected by the senses. Drop this assumption and the "magic" of miracles appears, the "pink unicorns" disappear, and the Creator God can become known.
Why does the pink unicorns disappear? If we assume there is more than what can be detected, how come the pink unicorns cannot become known the same way the creator God or the magic of miracles can?
The undetectable part of our universe can't be detected.
That was my point. They infer the directly undetectable part from the detectable but refuse to use the same line of reasoning if the concept of God is involved.Technically the *effect* of something can be detected even if the hypothetical mass/energy cannot. We can see the effect of God on peoples lives.
Atheists don't necessarily reject all ideas that fail to show up in controlled experimentation in the lab, just any ideas that relate to the topic of "God".
As I said in a previous post, one of the main points why, after all these years, I still cannot claim to "understand" Christians (or other theists) is that the second I think I have figured out one of them, another pops up and tells me "Oh, no, this isn't what I believe at all!".
So if I try to figure out the OP in light of the other posts that have been made here by other Christians, I need to come to the conclusion that atheists are atheists because they cannot see that there might be more to reality than what senses can detect.
That leads atheists to believe in other totally made up and undetectable, supernatural stuff, which they do accept as reality even if it cannot be detected by senses.
Basically what Kenny and others are saying here is: you are not better than me. Your stuff isn't better or more reliable than mine. All of that is ridiculous and potentially non-factual.
So perhaps if dysert could come back and explain why we should accept his non-detectable stuff over our non-detectable stuff...?
If you had a way to distinguish what you "detected" from what another believer "detected", you might have a point.Non detectable to you.
If you had a way to distinguish what you "detected" from what another believer "detected", you might have a point.
If you had a way to distinguish "detected" from "imagined", you might have a point.
But you don't...
Making such negative assumptions about the person you talk with doesn´t really help the conversation. It makes you look empty handed.The point is that if it has God attached to it you automatically become blind to all points.
Really?The point is that if it has God attached to it you automatically become blind to all points.
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?