What is the best argument for an atheist?

[Muri27]

I think its about the bible not jesus.

Jesus was a rebel in his time. if the stories are true (which i just can't say they are or aren't) he was a great person and led the humanity into the next level of continuous.

But the people after Jesus who'm used his name to put a 'sin' on the mankind which we are born with, and have no say in.

This is the most disgusting thing i can think of. Blaming a person who has not done anything except being born, for the suffering Jesus has had.

the bible (the way it is presented to the mankind) on the other hand provides a absolute truth which we should blindly trust in to make it happen. It's a neverending circle which just ties the knot even thighter if it is being questioned, Because you have to believe in it!


But i think this forum should point out the difference between spirituality and religion.
alot of the arguments run cris-cros with eachother on these matters.

 

[Orias]

I think its about the bible not jesus.

Jesus was a rebel in his time. if the stories are true (which i just can't say they are or aren't) he was a great person and led the humanity into the next level of continuous.

But the people after Jesus who'm used his name to put a 'sin' on the mankind which we are born with, and have no say in.

This is the most disgusting thing i can think of. Blaming a person who has not done anything except being born, for the suffering Jesus has had.

the bible (the way it is presented to the mankind) on the other hand provides a absolute truth which we should blindly trust in to make it happen. It's a neverending circle which just ties the knot even thighter if it is being questioned, Because you have to believe in it!


But i think this forum should point out the difference between spirituality and religion.
alot of the arguments run cris-cros with eachother on these matters.

Yes, where would the bible be if Jesus didn't exist though?

Do you see my point?

Blaming problems on innocent groups of people is known as, scapegoating, and is quit common among religious fanatics.

There is a big difference between spirituality and religion, and I am glad you have brought that up.

However, the two go hand in hand, since spiritual aspects come from within inner belief.

One may be as impertinent to say, oh spirituality is irrelevant to divinity, yet it isn't because many very spiritual people believe in some form of divine intervention (again what we make of our perceptions).

 

[NeverGotBetter]

The "prove it!" argument does get boring after a while, so I try to use some other ones. One of them that I've used is as follows: the person says they're a christian of whatever denomination. If their argument is so true as they claim, why isn't it supported by fellow believers? In asking this I make the assumption other denominations were formed because they disagreed with how the rest of christianity was viewing something.

Another argument is god is perfectly capable of making a perfect world as evidenced by heaven. If he wants us to be with him and he is more than capable of doing that, why doesn't he? Why does one support a self-defeating belief? I say self-defeating because the bible considers all people sinners, so everyone it is not "innocent until proven guilty", it's "guilty until proven innocent". Also, whenever something good happens that you wanted, no matter how much of a role you played, it gets attributed to some other entity (god). It is as though the belief makes you start from the bottom of the barrel, provides no respect to you, very little compassion for humanity, etc... . Why would one choose to believe in this and want to be treated as such? Most people want to be treated with respect and have their dignity but this is the opposite.

Third argument: Many christians blame Adam and Eve for bringing sin into the world. According to christianity, this is not possible for a few reasons. First, god made everything there ever was and will be, he is the maker of everything. For Adam and Eve to make sin, this means they are beyond god's power and since we are descendents of them, we too should be beyond his power. Somehow though Adam and Eve were made by him. Second, god is all-knowing so he knew what would happen in the end. Third, he's all-powerful so he could have decided to not let it happen but he did anyway. So there's a being that knows what will happen but doesn't care to help you (i.e. praying is wasted effort), he's all-powerful so he is capable of helping and as seen throughout the Old Testament, he prefers violence. To believe in such a character for peace or anything else makes no sense because he won't help as he doesn't want to and he does want you to suffer. Amazingly, people want to be with him in heaven, the "head quarters of god"! So I ask christians, are they sadists? When the answer is yes, this makes sense but when it is no, it makes no sense at all yet they still want to be with him and they still pray hoping he will change his mind and help them. So when a christian condemns a non-believer, such as an atheist, I respond with the above, which simply is, the same thing will happen to you.

Last argument: those who are not christian but are believers in at least one god or higher being can still have success in their lives or failure in their lives. The ratio is 50/50, about the same as it is for atheists and christians. If god were nice to christians, wouldn't they have more success? Afterlife experience is only relevant when one is planning to die in some way but while they're on Earth, alive, and willing to live, afterlife stuff doesn't matter. So why do they not get better treatment than others? Many claim god helps them or they pray to god for help, guidance, etc... but why is there no evidence he helps (except in praying). I say except in praying because I believe if you reherse the same thing over and over, applying it to different things, you will believe it more and may favour it more. So feeling better from praying can be due to god or due to this, there's no way for them to know nor for others to know. But if they pray they'll get a 95% on their math test when they haven't studied and have been failing the past tests, getting a 95% would seem like an act of divine intervention. This doesn't seem to occur though, either they fail again or they study, which is like praying, we cannot know which caused the higher mark. So the point of this argument is think of something one wants but cannot yet get. Don't make any effort towards getting it yourself but pray to get it over and over. For example, pray that when you go downstairs, a sandwich will be made but you won't make it nor will someone else. Keep praying and looking: does it come?

 

[Muri27]

well these things should not be watched with the mind who is based on duality, with good and bad/ right or wrong.

I am going to go with 'where would the bible be if Jesus name was not used the way it was now'

well since i can't predict the future (or past if different choices are made) I would guess the bible would be the oldest history book filled with ancient story's of that time since it would not have been adjusted to the christian view/controlling propeganda.

As i see spirituality as a own way to see and experience the world around you, to see the world how you want to see it. (for example god created the world).

Religion is nothing more than a man made 'company' to provide people with a truth which they should follow and all who do not are enemies. For heavens sake people were killed for this!!! how can you not be ashamed for knowing this and not rebel against it??

But it's always easy to have 1 common enemy which makes us unite ever further and ties the knot around our neck which is called religion even more...

And for all the christians here.. how about we stop waiting to get into heaven and start heaven on earth?

Edit: and frankly it is silly to discuss what's in the bible or not, we should look what it left into the world and how we humans handle it.

 

[outhouse]

What is the best argument for an atheist?

simple

No one picks a religion because its good or even makes a bit of sense or even if its %100 fiction.

You belong to a religion based only because of where you live and the people your surrounded by.

You never had a choice for your beliefs to pick what you wanted due to the facts at hand.

When people are young they believe in things like santa cluas and the easter bunny and jesus.

Some people never grow up completely

 

[Orias]

simple

No one picks a religion because its good or even makes a bit of sense or even if its %100 fiction.

You belong to a religion based only because of where you live and the people your surrounded by.

You never had a choice for your beliefs to pick what you wanted due to the facts at hand.

When people are young they believe in things like santa cluas and the easter bunny and jesus.

Some people never grow up completely

I disagree.

Religion exists for comfort.

I grew up and was surrounded Catholic/Christians my whole life, yet I turned out Satanic.

Atheists don't have an argument. Its just as good as a Theist's argument.

 

[Muri27]

I disagree.

Religion exists for comfort.

I grew up and was surrounded Catholic/Christians my whole life, yet I turned out Satanic.

Atheists don't have an argument. Its just as good as a Theist's argument.

for comfort? what do you exactly mean with this? that is a luxurious addition to our life or?

nobody really knows thats the damn problem issent it ?

going to toss a personal dilemma on the table to see what you think of it.

Can you blame a person for being 'ignorant'? (not willing to find their own truth but accepting what other people tell them)

I am just sick of the world how things are going, and it blows my head not everyone agrees with me.

Just googl'd which term would actually apply to me... i guess i have to go with

Pantheism.

 

[Debunker]

The "prove it!" argument does get boring after a while, so I try to use some other ones. One of them that I've used is as follows: the person says they're a christian of whatever denomination. If their argument is so true as they claim, why isn't it supported by fellow believers? In asking this I make the assumption other denominations were formed because they disagreed with how the rest of christianity was viewing something.

Another argument is god is perfectly capable of making a perfect world as evidenced by heaven. If he wants us to be with him and he is more than capable of doing that, why doesn't he? Why does one support a self-defeating belief? I say self-defeating because the bible considers all people sinners, so everyone it is not "innocent until proven guilty", it's "guilty until proven innocent". Also, whenever something good happens that you wanted, no matter how much of a role you played, it gets attributed to some other entity (god). It is as though the belief makes you start from the bottom of the barrel, provides no respect to you, very little compassion for humanity, etc... . Why would one choose to believe in this and want to be treated as such? Most people want to be treated with respect and have their dignity but this is the opposite.

Third argument: Many christians blame Adam and Eve for bringing sin into the world. According to christianity, this is not possible for a few reasons. First, god made everything there ever was and will be, he is the maker of everything. For Adam and Eve to make sin, this means they are beyond god's power and since we are descendents of them, we too should be beyond his power. Somehow though Adam and Eve were made by him. Second, god is all-knowing so he knew what would happen in the end. Third, he's all-powerful so he could have decided to not let it happen but he did anyway. So there's a being that knows what will happen but doesn't care to help you (i.e. praying is wasted effort), he's all-powerful so he is capable of helping and as seen throughout the Old Testament, he prefers violence. To believe in such a character for peace or anything else makes no sense because he won't help as he doesn't want to and he does want you to suffer. Amazingly, people want to be with him in heaven, the "head quarters of god"! So I ask christians, are they sadists? When the answer is yes, this makes sense but when it is no, it makes no sense at all yet they still want to be with him and they still pray hoping he will change his mind and help them. So when a christian condemns a non-believer, such as an atheist, I respond with the above, which simply is, the same thing will happen to you.

Last argument: those who are not christian but are believers in at least one god or higher being can still have success in their lives or failure in their lives. The ratio is 50/50, about the same as it is for atheists and christians. If god were nice to christians, wouldn't they have more success? Afterlife experience is only relevant when one is planning to die in some way but while they're on Earth, alive, and willing to live, afterlife stuff doesn't matter. So why do they not get better treatment than others? Many claim god helps them or they pray to god for help, guidance, etc... but why is there no evidence he helps (except in praying). I say except in praying because I believe if you reherse the same thing over and over, applying it to different things, you will believe it more and may favour it more. So feeling better from praying can be due to god or due to this, there's no way for them to know nor for others to know. But if they pray they'll get a 95% on their math test when they haven't studied and have been failing the past tests, getting a 95% would seem like an act of divine intervention. This doesn't seem to occur though, either they fail again or they study, which is like praying, we cannot know which caused the higher mark. So the point of this argument is think of something one wants but cannot yet get. Don't make any effort towards getting it yourself but pray to get it over and over. For example, pray that when you go downstairs, a sandwich will be made but you won't make it nor will someone else. Keep praying and looking: does it come?

I really enjoy debunking smug and convinced people of their take on life, existence, being, reality, logic, and their world view in general. I am very objective in debunking faulty religious beliefs and crazy political views. Most beliefs can be debunked to some degree as there always seems to be gaps in the logic of every philosophical world view. In my opinion the Christian and theist world view is the most difficult world view to debunk. The atheist world view is the easiest to debunk, Atheism offers no world view but is more like existentialism and is really very foolish not being supported by any metaphysical reality.

With all due respect, most of the post on this thread represent pure nonsense and are not worthy of a response but represent nitpicking of the worse non-intellectual aspects of Christianity. You do not challenge the ontology of of Christianity, which is Far superior to the ontology of atheism.

Look at the unfairness of the first comment by referencing "prove it" argument. In any legitimate intellectual debate, both are required to prove their theis statements by logical explanations. In any fair minded debate, both sides are presented by the best scholars and each states their own true position.It is fair to challenge their true stated position but you get no points for challenging a point that is not true of an opponents position.

You should never demand a Christian to prove anything unless you are willing to prove your position that there is no God. Atheist just will not do this. It is not so simple to just say "there is no God". Without God, you must show how reasoning and logic (induction & deduction), metaphysics (cosmology/ontology) and knowledge
are possible. Christians will not take your criticism seriously if you can not do this.

The ideas criticised in this post and throughout this thread targets mostly what atheist think Christianity is saying, not what Christianity is saying. Pointing to the many denominations of Christianity does not mean Christianity is false. Atheist are the most diverse thinkers on the earth. There is no unanimity in their thinking whatsoever. That does not prove them all in error but most Christians do think they are. The many moral codes that exist among humanist is an example of the diversity of the thinking of atheist.

Most Christians have a sensible ontological view of God and the universe. They believe in cause and effect, free will rather than determinism, with the overall belief that persons reap what they sow and God gives the unjust and just the same playing field. Most Christians are not obsessed with heaven or hell. Most Christians do not view God as an eternal torturer of sinners but a savior of the human race. But atheist target the worse representatives of Christianity to use as examples of the shortcomings of faith in God. Of course, Christians do the same to atheist and when they do this, atheist do not like to be compared to Hitler, Stalin, and many other such people.

 

[outhouse]

I disagree.

Religion exists for comfort.

I grew up and was surrounded Catholic/Christians my whole life, yet I turned out Satanic.

Atheists don't have an argument. Its just as good as a Theist's argument.

choice and comfort are two different things.

 

[Muri27]

I really enjoy debunking smug and convinced people of their take on life, existence, being, reality, logic, and their world view in general. I am very objective in debunking faulty religious beliefs and crazy political views. Most beliefs can be debunked to some degree as there always seems to be gaps in the logic of every philosophical world view. In my opinion the Christian and theist world view is the most difficult world view to debunk. The atheist world view is the easiest to debunk, Atheism offers no world view but is more like existentialism and is really very foolish not being supported by any metaphysical reality.

With all due respect, most of the post on this thread represent pure nonsense and are not worthy of a response but represent nitpicking of the worse non-intellectual aspects of Christianity. You do not challenge the ontology of of Christianity, which is Far superior to the ontology of atheism.

Look at the unfairness of the first comment by referencing "prove it" argument. In any legitimate intellectual debate, both are required to prove their theis statements by logical explanations. In any fair minded debate, both sides are presented by the best scholars and each states their own true position.It is fair to challenge their true stated position but you get no points for challenging a point that is not true of an opponents position.

You should never demand a Christian to prove anything unless you are willing to prove your position that there is no God. Atheist just will not do this. It is not so simple to just say "there is no God". Without God, you must show how reasoning and logic (induction & deduction), metaphysics (cosmology/ontology) and knowledge
are possible. Christians will not take your criticism seriously if you can not do this.

The ideas criticised in this post and throughout this thread targets mostly what atheist think Christianity is saying, not what Christianity is saying. Pointing to the many denominations of Christianity does not mean Christianity is false. Atheist are the most diverse thinkers on the earth. There is no unanimity in their thinking whatsoever. That does not prove them all in error but most Christians do think they are. The many moral codes that exist among humanist is an example of the diversity of the thinking of atheist.

Most Christians have a sensible ontological view of God and the universe. They believe in cause and effect, free will rather than determinism, with the overall belief that persons reap what they sow and God gives the unjust and just the same playing field. Most Christians are not obsessed with heaven or hell. Most Christians do not view God as an eternal torturer of sinners but a savior of the human race. But atheist target the worse representatives of Christianity to use as examples of the shortcomings of faith in God. Of course, Christians do the same to atheist and when they do this, atheist do not like to be compared to Hitler, Stalin, and many other such people.

wow you love to destroy other people's take on the world, how sad...

I look into the world with my eyes open and ready for anything.
And no i don't believe what we are told is the truth, is actually the truth.

Fact is the world is a horrid place where nobody respect eachother for what he/she believes due to ages of keeping the human mind stupid and whatever you do, DONT THINK!!! we will do it for you ( and people accept this)

how about maybe thanking athiests for spending their time.. trying to not spend your time in a complete illusion?( it is what they think, not my words)
Or thanking christians trying to change people to also believe in god so they also go to heaven.

the problem what i also have with religions, is that they give people a absolute truth. But that truth does not correspond with the world around us.
moral code is different with each person.

and your tone just makes you sound like and *** with your debunking...
( its late and this might just seem like alot of useless babling to you folks.

Edit: but a savior of the human race. do we need a savior of the human race? because the last time i checked alot of problems we have actually come from these kind of talk.

 

[NeverGotBetter]

Debunker, only the last bits of your post actually addressed what I said, the rest was "warm-up". You also mention how christianity in ways are superior to atheism. Then there's also the sad bit of how you love debunking (original choice of words considering your username) "smug" people. Ironic you mention "smug" when the majority of your post is praising yourself without addressing much of what I said.

Look at the unfairness of the first comment by referencing "prove it" argument.

Where is this unfairness when I mention what I will NOT do, especially when this thing is what you consider unfair. I say I will NOT do it so that's unfair?

You should never demand a Christian to prove anything unless you are willing to prove your position that there is no God. Atheist just will not do this.

I think it's unfair how you say what an entire group of people will do when that group is very heterogeneous. Many atheists won't do this because they use logic: the burden of proof is said to be on the christians to show such a god exists, otherwise the atheists proves a double negative (not believe there is not a god). This occurs when there's the "prove it!" argument.

It is not so simple to just say "there is no God". Without God, you must show how reasoning and logic (induction & deduction), metaphysics (cosmology/ontology) and knowledge
are possible. Christians will not take your criticism seriously if you can not do this.

Reasoning, logic and knowledge are constantly shown how they're possible without god in just about every debate against christians. Cosmology from a scientific view is shown but not from a religious view. Ontology, well you have me there 10 points for you. I'd have to read a lot more in ontology material to begin to provide information on it. So with ontology out of the way, the rest are explained very easily. For example, an atheist may use science to determine knowledge and use information from the known environment in any of their reasonings. Many of them can be supported by evidence through science, although I'm sure not all atheists fall into this group. The ones that do fall into it are the ones I'm considering as I haven't had experience with ones that don't. Cosmology fits into the same here when you consider it scientifically as how the universe and planets got here, and possibly how we got here on Earth through abiogenesis and evolution. Ontology, well as mentioned, will have to wait for another day.

The ideas criticised in this post and throughout this thread targets mostly what atheist think Christianity is saying, not what Christianity is saying. Pointing to the many denominations of Christianity does not mean Christianity is false.

That is not why I used that. I used that, and I explicitly stated it was used to address why other christians do not agree with what one said. That doesn't mean it is false nor does it mean it is true. It means there is uncertainty so it has to show not only support for itself but support for why it can refute what other denominations say.

Most Christians have a sensible ontological view of God and the universe. They believe in cause and effect, free will rather than determinism, with the overall belief that persons reap what they sow and God gives the unjust and just the same playing field. Most Christians are not obsessed with heaven or hell. Most Christians do not view God as an eternal torturer of sinners but a savior of the human race.

Since when do atheists not believe in free will and since when do christians not believe in determinism? The notion that what a christian does in their life will affect them in the afterlife is based on determinism. The bible even says people's fates are pre-determined, which results from determinism so christians are not free.

As for free will on atheists, that's obvious for anyone with half a brain to figure out. Free will implies their actions are not due to the influence of a higher being. Atheists do accept this and one could make the argument for christians as well.

 

[gnomon]

I haven't read a thread this bad since...........last week.

 

[LDox]

An argument that I have seen used is a jug of milk.
"Many Christians (not all) state that God answers in one of three ways "Yes, No and wait." If you ask a jug of milk the same question you were going to ask God you would get the same result. Thus a jug of milk is as powerful as God, or God does not exist. Which seems more likely to you?"

 

[crimsonlung]

An argument that I have seen used is a jug of milk.
"Many Christians (not all) state that God answers in one of three ways "Yes, No and wait." If you ask a jug of milk the same question you were going to ask God you would get the same result. Thus a jug of milk is as powerful as God, or God does not exist. Which seems more likely to you?"

Iv'e seen this:

[youtube]jk6ILZAaAMI[/youtube]
YouTube - The best optical illusion in the world!

Its actually a pretty good explanation of Christianity being bogus. or most religions.

 

[Gauss]

There is none since his life is meaningless and he denies his origin(having been born a God in the cosmos).


Atheists believe in radio waves, yet they can not see them. Atheists believe in science, who recognizes a multi-dimensional universe. Atheists hence believe that all dimensions must be empty and lifeless because science can not see the plane of other dimensions, just dots.

A human being should believe in Gods since he has no other way of finding salvation.

Anyway, it is "modern" to be an atheist today(or maybe even mor eso a decade ago) but is is not so that it was predicted in all the prophecies? Also their destiny has been prophesied since ages.


A prophecy is just a perspective from another dimension where our time does not affect anything, hence the true prophets can see our past and our future.

 

[Muri27]

'A human being should believe in Gods since he has no other way of finding salvation.'

Well here we go with the guilth thing again, i just find it disturbing how christians have this necklock on themselves by believing 'there is no other way to salvation', it takes the fun out of life.

Life if meaningless if you believe this issent it? why should we find salvation? because jesus died for our sins?
maybe yours but certainly not mine, I don't see it as a sin as being born.

so here is what christianity does in my eyes
- it says all people al bad and can't be trusted and only in the way of god can we clean ourselves. (this is just so horrible, we can never have a normal world around us if people believe this)
- we are born with a sin because jesus died for us. Sure if you want to believe that some guy 2000 years ago has/should have ANY impact in your life.. that you just give yourself into slavery.. its the same thing.

life is your own, and yes you actually help yourself by helping others.. weird huh?

And saying it is 'modern' to be atheist is just a really stupid thing to say aswell...
you can also say it is modern we dont crap on the streets anymore
Or that it is modern we let woman vote...

people THINK and use their brains to make decisions because they are fed up with the lies and centuries of prosecution of your beloved holy church..

and i actualy think maybe 1% of the people are really athiest, believing into another truth than religion provides people does not make you a athiest.

 

[gnomon]

Again, all one has to do is define atheist to find the best argument for an atheist.

Be it an irreligious atheist such as Sam Harris or a religious atheist such as a Chan Buddhist.

This entire thread was built on poor assumptions and ill defined terminology.

 

[Orias]

choice and comfort are two different things.

When you separate the labels.

But you don't chose discomfort.

Even in a sadistic or horrifying way.

 

[Jordan]

What is the best argument for an atheist?
Since an atheist has no grounds of belief to stand is it normal for them to criticize other people’s religion to buff up their own lack of philosophical views and beliefs?

Atheists do not lack philosophical views, they simply believe that there is no deity. That doesn't mean that they have no beliefs, it just means that they hold the belief that no deity exists.

 

[Debunker]

Thank you NGB for your fine response.
Your take on denominations is well received for we both know there differences among atheist and Christians alike. If anything, it means that using the same source of information does not guarantee unanimity.

Ironic you mention "smug" when the majority of your post is praising yourself without addressing much of what I said.

As intelligent as you are, you are not really interested in spiting contest. Most of the assertions in your post, fit in well with discussion with Christians who, though earnest in their faith, have not philosophically thought through their faith and are walking by blind faith. Some atheist are this way also. My comment about "smug" was intended for those people both of whom are easy to debunk. It may be a little sadistic of me to enjoy debunking them, I admit; but, I don't get out and about anymore and its the only fun I have. By the way, sometimes I get debunked but I like that too. That is why we are here, right?

I think it's unfair how you say what an entire group of people will do when that group is very heterogeneous. Many atheists won't do this because they use logic: the burden of proof is said to be on the christians to show such a god exists, otherwise the atheists proves a double negative (not believe there is not a god). This occurs when there's the "prove it!" argument.

It is unfair to challenge the uninformed and not leave them a reason for why you attack their faith. Pick out the best of the Christians, the enlighting him, you have accomplished something. You are not saying that atheist are not obliged to explain their logic of why they believe what they do while they challenge the faith of another person, are you? Otherwise your point is well taken.

Reasoning, logic and knowledge are constantly shown how they're possible without god in just about every debate against christians. Cosmology from a scientific view is shown but not from a religious view. Ontology, well you have me there

There are two broad topics of what is really real. What is real is metaphysics. One type of real is cosmology. In cosmology the stars, planets, mountains, creatures, atoms, cells, and generally all physical things are considered.

Ontological thing are beings. Spirit, existence,logic, scientific methods, God, Paul Tillichs ground of being, soul, mind stuff, first cause, logos, all these things are the subjects of ontology. In short, ontology is the study of being. You can have pure being which one might not be called God. The prime directive on Star Trek comes to mind in this last category.

You have probably noticed that many things cross over into both ontology and cosmology. Some philosophers believe that ontology and cosmology are one and the same.With this illustration, we should be on the same footing. I hope you did no my sharing this with you.

So with ontology out of the way

, With our understanding of ontology, can you see how we can not just dismiss it?

As for determinism, many atheist believe in it strongly and do not believe in free will at all. Some believe in free will and not in derertnism.It is very difficult to explain cosmology without ontology.

Many of them can be supported by evidence through science, although I'm sure not all atheists fall into this group. The ones that do fall into it are the ones I'm considering as I haven't had experience with ones that don't. Cosmology fits into the same here when you consider it scientifically as how the universe and planets got here, and possibly how we got here on Earth through abiogenesis and evolution. Ontology, well as mentioned, will have to wait for another day.

Atheist as a whole usually deny self evident truths or eternal truths because this would be an admission that God exist.Theist point out that science and logic are eternal truths that are self evident and come from God.Every scientist that is worth his salt depends on a strict innate logic to arrive at his conclusions. I 2would never trust a doctor that did not use ontology in his treatment of me. We use ontology to measure cosmology.

Now, If you are ready to challenge my belief in God, my ears are open. If you would enjoy my challenging your unbelief, let the fun begin.