Anti-Neocons

for the 500th time

I am not saying Atheists have to disprove anything. What I am saying, or what I am trying to say, is that x does not disprove the existence of God, as has been claimed.

If you say x disproves y, and I say that it doesn't, that doesn't mean I'm saying you have to disprove y, only that x fails to do so.

Yes, I am aware of that, and my comment wasn't directed towards atheism, but towards a specific argument, namely, that natural explanations for phenomena are 100% proof against the existence of God.



Indeed, and I would be insane to dispute the scientific data, which I am not going to do, nor is there any need for me to do so, since there is no contradiction between the scientific data and my religion. However, the actual scientific data, and the conclusions that scientists draw from it, are 2 different things. I can accept the former without necessarily having to accept the latter. Now, with regards to evolution, I also think it is currently the most viable explanation for the data that is available, and aside for its explanation of the origin of humans, there is no contradiction between it and my religion.

First of you are starting with the asumption of creation which is a logically fallacy.

Youll have to prove there was ever only nothing to necesitate a creation to occur in the first place and even with that you will be forced to say at minimal there was only nothing except for this god/magic figure and then it made everything, also magically. And then why it did it and when it did it and what was it doing before that just sitting there forever doing nothing?

I say it is a logical fallacy because of this. And this is not science, this is more simple its basic logic. Something can not come from nothing nor nothing from something yet somethingness is here. Thus since it can not be nothing and can not come from nothing, then it did not come from nothing. In fact it did not come. It IS. thus matter must be eternal.

The answer is not, oh there was only nothing accept for this one magical thing and it just created everthing at some point in time so that hundreds of billions of years later when people evolved on earth it could write a book for them (through them) and explain what they need to do so that it doesn't burn them.

Seriously sit down and think about it. That is why I call religious people retarded.

lastly for the 501 time you can't prove a negative. I dont have to prove there are no elves riding unicorns, you have to prove that there are. If you can't then the idea of them it is safe to say came from imagination not reality. And you also can't point to something unexplained yet and say ah ha the elves riding unicorns made that that way and stick to that until I have the must larger task of explaining how it actually works. I dont even have to know how it works, all I have to know is how it doesn't work and that's elves riding unicorns.

If you ask me how a computer works I mean down to the chemical and electric reactions I have no idea but other people do and I know its natural not super natural. you can't just say god does it, same with how a cell reproduces, I kind of know how that works but not every detail but I do know its natural not super natural. And if we are to adopt a path to learn about this world and imporve our own technology and health and understanding then we had best chose to deal with it all godless in a natural way and leave god for literary entertainment of severe momonets of emotional distress or for children unable to get their minds around how things really work.

_________________
This site is against war, Zionism, (or any other form of racism), profiteering, and all forms of government corruption, mass media deception, and cover ups. This is not a site to flail on about space aliens-illuminati-masonic-deathcult-jewish-catholic-lizard-lucifarian-jesuit-queen-barvarian-etc bull hockey. Take that junk somewhere else.
My Twitter
"It doesn't matter who we are underneath. It is what we do that defines us." Batman

Google version of War by Deception (Magic Bunnies)
Pass HR 1207 and S604 audit the Fed



ry ryan dawson author politics political antineocon anti-neocon antineocons anti-neocons raising the volume of peace - news the media is paid not to tell you how they blep you

Even if we say that matter is eternal, it would also be eternally inert, unless, and until, it is acted on by something else that is not simply matter. As for creation, it cannot happen unless there is a creator, and I don't think anyone actually believes that something can come from nothing. You either believe that everything always existed and always will exist, or you believe that everything ultimately came from an eternal being/force of some sort. In this case, I prefer the cosmological argument, which posits the necessity of an uncaused cause; something that is both uncaused, and a cause in itself. The idea of an infinite set of causes without an uncaused cause to start it all, basically amounts to a series of non-existents, which is why an uncaused cause is necessary. An uncaused cause, by its very definition, is eternal, and by being the initial causing agent on its own, it has to also be volitional. This ultimately means that it is a living being, since intention implies knowledge, and knowledge and intention imply life. The rest just explains itself, and the concept of God becomes the ultimate conclusion.

Of course, if you believe that everything always existed and always will exist, then there is no need to come to that conclusion. However, there's still the problem of the necessity of an uncaused cause.



The story doesn't quite go that way, as the idea isn't that the whole point of creation was simply to tell people what to do so they don't go to Hell. Yes, there is the Heaven-Hell thing, but I don't see anything saying that they were the motives for the the creation of everything.



I never said anything about proving a negative. All I said was that something does not disprove something else. That's all. I never said anyone had to prove that something doesn't exist. However, as you should know "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". Something having a natural explanation is not in itself a refutation against any alleged supernatural involvement whatsoever. It doesn't have to be one or the other, as it can be both.

Yes, even if you don't know exactly how something works, you at least do know how it doesn't work. However, with elves and unicorns, you still have an idea of what they look like and how they do things. Therefore, you know what it is and what it isn't with regard to them. However, in terms of understanding, the concept of the supernatural is completely abstract; you don't know what it would look like and you don't know how it would work. Therefore, in this case, you cannot really know what is, and what isn't. If you cannot know these things, then you cannot really say what involves the supernatural and what doesn't. So, in the end, we are left with no definitive answers, only uncertainty.

Wrong on the contrary it is entirely OBBJECTIVE.

Wrong

It can't be acted on by something else, not unless you are inventing a thing that is not matter and yet is not nothing and yet can interact with matter too.

Two basic properties of all matter set itself in motion, heat and gravity. Other properties of matter which are very varifiable or the other forces. Ever heard of chemistry? It's not random. Its the nature of matter to move, it really can't be inert, and its its nature to go through every combination the lasting forms being self replicating like DNA etc etc. You really dont know squat about science do you?

The assumption that all was just a bunch of rocks sitting still in space is as silly and dumb as your prior assumption that all was once nothing and had to be created. you're however many years old and never thought on your own matter was eternal until I said it. Thats because you already had the god idea placed into from a young age and thats explain all explination why is X oh because the magic things made it that way. Its not even an answer.

to get this back on topic we're talking about the Jewish religion now that is a ridiculous fairy tale no doubts about it.

_________________
This site is against war, Zionism, (or any other form of racism), profiteering, and all forms of government corruption, mass media deception, and cover ups. This is not a site to flail on about space aliens-illuminati-masonic-deathcult-jewish-catholic-lizard-lucifarian-jesuit-queen-barvarian-etc bull hockey. Take that junk somewhere else.
My Twitter
"It doesn't matter who we are underneath. It is what we do that defines us." Batman

Google version of War by Deception (Magic Bunnies)
Pass HR 1207 and S604 audit the Fed



ry ryan dawson author politics political antineocon anti-neocon antineocons anti-neocons raising the volume of peace - news the media is paid not to tell you how they blep you

How can it be objective, when what may have been regarded as "supernatural" at one point, is later shown to be completely natural? In such a case, "supernatural" would simply be a term that people use to describe what is unexplained to them.



Heat and gravity aren't really "matter" though, nor are any of those other forces. Matter has to have mass and volume for it to be matter, and things like "heat", "gravity" or those other forces do not.



I never said I actually believed that matter was eternal. I only accepted the idea for argument's sake to make the point that it doesn't matter. I've already explained that I agree with the cosmological argument and why more than once.