Atheism or No Intelligence Allowed

[Altfish]

His vision and who we are are intertwined. I can show this from many angles. It's impossible for our identity to exist without his vision defining us. I can show this from many angles, but it's self-evident. If you were interested, you would ask if I can elaborate and prove it aside from it being self-evident.

I can remind you how it's impossible that any but the absolute being vision define us. It's impossible for even the exalted chosen holy kings who witness us and our deeds as accurately and close to God's vision as possible for creation to do, to define us, as well, so let alone our minds that are mislead.

But as has been said previously, you can use the same argument to prove Bigfoot or Unicorns exist.

 

[ChristineM]

Yes it can. You can think about it and although it's self-evident, there are in fact, countless proofs for it and reminders that can show it being true and reminding you how clear you know this fact.

Wait, this i got to see.
Tell me when you are going to independently verify yourself and I'll sell the tickets to politicians who have searched for such a trick for years and invite the worlds top scientists to study your act of Impossibility and maybe even create a new scientific discipline in self delusionment

 

[Link]

Another thing to think about, is good deeds and bad deeds something linked to who we are and in exactly which way? Is it just how psychologically we are influenced it or is there any objective value to who we are, and deeds (good or bad) form who we are, and we write in our souls and they form and are alive?

That is our past states dead with time and all that matters is how we remember them and influenced by that memory, or are our actions accounted for that they give us an objective reality regardless of what we think of them? The latter is manifest to me, and all remembering actions for it to have an effect on us, every human has to believe in that, that our actions are objectively linked to who we are, and it's not just memories.

 

[QuestioningMind]

Look at my file above.

Dr. Richard Dawkins in the movie Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed said:
``I am atheist because there is no proof that God exists."
It is not logical, the same level of dishonesty has this sentence:
``I am atheist because the sky is blue." He would demonstrate a reason to be an atheist
if he would say: ``I am atheist, because there is proof that God does not exist."

What a completely ridiculous claim. Do you not believe in invisible magical pixies because you have proof they don't exist or is it because there is no verffiable evidence to suggest that they do exist?

 

[Link]

Wait, this i got to see.
Tell me when you are going to independently verify yourself and I'll sell the tickets to politicians who have searched for such a trick for years and invite the worlds top scientists to study your act of Impossibility and maybe even create a new scientific discipline in self delusionment

When you look at the moon, whether you going to estimate it's size or measure it or withhold judgment, you know it's there with a size. We see ourselves from a distance, and we have judgments we gained from society, some of it true, some it false, some of it reasonable, and some of silly non-sense. We can't define who we are, we go astray, but we do tend to know things about ourselves and also ignorant about things about ourselves, and also have false beliefs about ourselves as well.

So who you are, is where exactly? If it's you who makes it, what happens if you are wrong about something about yourself. Physically you exist regardless, but who you are, needs an accurate judgment to exist. Or otherwise, it's a fantasy with no reality, nothing but an illusion.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Check this for irrationality: the electron is the particle and the wave same time.

That is not an accurate statement.

Dr. Richard Dawkins in a religious movie [Expelled: No Intelligence
Allowed] said something like this: ``I am atheist because there is no
proof that God exists." I believe it is incomplete, so, let me try to read
between the lines: ``I am atheist because there is no [globally accepted]
proof that God exists and I want to be atheist."

You do not get to read between the lines of somebody else's thought. If you want to know more about their thought, ask them. Don't make it up. That is a most disingenuous way to try and "make your point."

As to what you mean by "there is no [globally accepted] proof that God exists," well, undoubtedly God showed up on a piece of toast once (in the disguise of his Son) -- then you are right, that's not globally accepted. Actually, it's not accepted by pretty much anyone with the ability to reason.

 

[paarsurrey]

Dr. Richard Dawkins in a religious movie [Expelled: No Intelligence
Allowed] said something like this: ``I am atheist because there is no
proof that God exists." I believe it is incomplete, so, let me try to read
between the lines: ``I am atheist because there is no [globally accepted]
proof that God exists and I want to be atheist." Many respectful and valid
theists say: ``I am the theist because I want so, however, there is no
scientific proof for God yet." Richard would demonstrate an un-emotional
reason to be an atheist if he would say: ``I am atheist because there
is [non-debunked] proof that God does not exist."

If one means by God, Jesus-God of Pauline-Christianity then this Jesus-God never existed. God-the-Father whom Jesus-man worshiped and prayed to does exist, I understand. Right?

Regards

 

[ChristineM]

When you look at the moon, whether you going to estimate it's size or measure it or withhold judgment, you know it's there with a size. We see ourselves from a distance, and we have judgments we gained from society, some of it true, some it false, some of it reasonable, and some of silly non-sense. We can't define who we are, we go astray, but we do tend to know things about ourselves and also ignorant about things about ourselves, and also have false beliefs about ourselves as well.

So who you are, is where exactly? If it's you who makes it, what happens if you are wrong about something about yourself. Physically you exist regardless, but who you are, needs an accurate judgment to exist. Or otherwise, it's a fantasy with no reality, nothing but an illusion.

What has this to do with proof or no proof of a god?
What has this to do with proof in any form

 

[Subduction Zone]

And you being unconvinced doesn't do away with it being a proof.

So how are we going to settle this, who is wrong here, the believer presenting a proof (or not) or the non-believer has ignored to attentively receive it or not.

Wrong, it is still not a proof. You are only using circular arguments. That is a logical fallacy. You do not get to define "God" into existence, otherwise there would be beer volcanoes and stripper factories everywhere.

 

[Subduction Zone]

His vision and who we are are intertwined, it's impossible for who we are to have an accurate existence other then in his vision.

That only sounds like self delusion. You keep confirming Dawkins' claims.

 

[osgart]

His vision and who we are are intertwined, it's impossible for who we are to have an accurate existence other then in his vision.

Is that like revelation?

 

[Subduction Zone]

When you look at the moon, whether you going to estimate it's size or measure it or withhold judgment, you know it's there with a size. We see ourselves from a distance, and we have judgments we gained from society, some of it true, some it false, some of it reasonable, and some of silly non-sense. We can't define who we are, we go astray, but we do tend to know things about ourselves and also ignorant about things about ourselves, and also have false beliefs about ourselves as well.

So who you are, is where exactly? If it's you who makes it, what happens if you are wrong about something about yourself. Physically you exist regardless, but who you are, needs an accurate judgment to exist. Or otherwise, it's a fantasy with no reality, nothing but an illusion.

And what does this have to do with the existence of a god?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

If you could go back though, you could. If something is there, you will be able to prove he/she was there. So your example is poor.

Nah. This creature is hiding in the shadows, and doesn't come out at all until it's ready to attack. But even then it's still invisible, appearing as nothing more than one's shadow.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You can't prove a negative.
Such as, you cannot disprove the murderous shadow stalker in your room, watching your every move, waiting until you are at your most comfortable and secure before killing you. You cannot prove that is bullocks and doesn't exist.

This is not quite right. One can prove some negatives, but not all.

Here is an example. You are in Chicago to meet a friend of yours. You get a frantic call from him saying that the Sear's building just blew up (sorry, I don't know what they call it today). You are just a block or two away and drive by it. It is still there unharmed. You just proved that an event did not happen.

 

[RabbiO]

With all due respect. I admire your passion and persistence, but you really ought to find a good book on formal logic and critical thinking.

That would require a degree of humility on the part of the OP. Whatever, if any, good character traits are possessed by him, humility does not seem to be among them.

 

[Link]

What has this to do with proof or no proof of a god?
What has this to do with proof in any form

We aren't an illusion only if we are defined by God's vision.

 

[Subduction Zone]

We aren't an illusion only if we are defined by God's vision.

And if wishes were fishes we would be having halibut tonight.

 

[ChristineM]

We aren't an illusion only if we are defined by God's vision.

Wut?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Wut?

It means that we are just having leftovers tonight

 

[McBell]

When an atheist says: "I am atheist because there is no proof that God exists", he says a lie.
Correct?

No greater a lie than you saying that pokemonDSt.pdf is 100% by use of scientific ways of proof of God.

The same illogical level: "I am atheist because the sky is blue."

Your expertise in the art form known as strawman in no way assists your position.