padib said:
Andrespetmonkey said:
padib said:
Andrespetmonkey said:
padib said:
Runa216 said:
padib said:
Runa216 said:
aaaha, no. Your repeated inability to see through the fallacies of Religion should instantly disregard anything you have to say on the matter.
|
aaaha, no. Your repeated inability to see through the fallacies of Atheism should instantly disregard anything you have to say on the matter.
|
it's funny...because there are no inherent 'fallacies' in Atheism. There are questions left unanswered, yes, but the whole point of atheism is to accept these questions are unanswered and subsequently seek the truth about them rather than fill in the blanks as you deem fit. Therein lies the fallacy of religion: Assumptions of truth rather than proof of it.
Your crusade against atheism is frustrating to witness, that's for sure. Your assumptions about me are equally frustrating.
|
it's funny...because there are no inherent 'fallacies' in Religion. There are questions left unanswered, yes, but the whole point of religion is to accept these questions are unanswered and subsequently seek the truth about them rather than fill in the blanks as you deem fit. Therein lies the fallacy of atheism: Assumptions of truth rather than proof of it.
Your crusade against religion is frustrating to witness, that's for sure. Your assumptions about me are equally frustrating.
|
No padib, just no.
fallacy of atheism: Assumptions of truth rather than proof of it. No, atheism isn't an assumption of anything, it's a lack of an assumption really. Atheism is the default position until evidence of the existance of god(s) is given. I'm not claiming there is no god, I'm just at my default position of not believing in one until someone gives me a reason to. You are the one making the claim that there is a god, therefore the burden of proof is on you.
there are no inherent 'fallacies' in Religion. No comment.
|
No, you fail again. If you postulate that there is no God, you need to account for everything in life today; hence Evolution. Atheism isn't a convenient negative position as you would like it to be. Negating a grand cause, you need to make up for it with something else.
|
But padib, I don't postulate that there is no god, I don't know, the part that makes me atheist is where I say I don't think there is one (if you want to know why, you can ask). But I'm not asserting this, as I said, I don't know. And I will think there is one when I'm given evidence of it. You assert that a god exists (based on past conversations with you). You got any evidence? And furthermore, any evidence that this god is the god described in the bible?
To the part in bold: No I don't, I simply say I don't know what happened before the big bang (assuming that's what you're talking about) and don't make any assumptions as to what did happen or if anything happened.
|
There is no end to this damned debate. If all of nature can be explained without the agency of God, and especially if the creation of man is totally unrelated to the deity's cause, then we have just lost the greatest link to the divine that we had: Nature. To follow that route in my view is already a position of deceit. It's like someone worked on a masterpiece for years, and then people denying his work. Worse, they deny his ownership of said masterpiece. This, if true, is the sign of a stolen possession, and a broken relationship (with the creator).
Fair, I can't prove to you any of this is true either, but to me it goes beyond proof. When I see people denying the existence of God, what I generally witness is a source of pride, selfishness and arrogance. With that, I also witness the breakdown of family, very severely strained human bonds and other tragedies of human relationship building. I see abominations such as the holocost and the camps of Red Russia. You can argue that there is a grain of religion in the holocost, but it is vestigial, and for Russia's past in communism religion is inexistent.
Ambitions of grandure (twilight of the idols) lead to men making all the rules, and it becomes the law of the strongest that prevails. I see oppression, hate, and lies.
That's my POV, and I know you dislike it.
|
