Atheists and theists are the same.

[Mike375]

But that is just it, we do NOT know how it started. We have theories, but they are just that. And as you pointed out, our theories don't even work during the first second or two of the universe's existence. This does not mean we are wrong, we just don't have all the pieces to the puzzle. But new each new theory brings us closer to a better understanding, like M theory and Hologram theory.

Do have faith the answer will come?

We use the scientific method. It's logical, it's precise, it's methodical, above all, it's testable. .

Refer back to the start of your posting

 

[Mike375]

If this theory is proved wrong, then we will come up with another. .

I know

The faith is unreal. No matter how much and how often the theories are wrong the faithful will hang on. Just introcuce a another theory.

 

[Mike375]

Proof is not required for the lack of something.

In the real word it is.

 

[Atomic Shrimp]

This is were you have it wrong with the idea that its necessary to not have examined the evidence to beleive in God.They have just come to a differnat conclusion to you, since there is no concrete evidence.Or are you sticking with - non thinking people beleive in God, therefore beleif in God is stupid , Alisa is not stupid, therefore Alisa beleives God doesn't exist. and Alisa must be right.Cos thats all I'm getting from you, no matter how you dress it up.

I agree. For a different example, consider the Loch Ness Monster.

Some people believe the LNM is real.
There is a large collection of supposedly supporting evidence
I find the evidence interesting, but not nearly conclusive or compelling enough
I find the LNM believers prone to wishful thinking regarding the evidence
I therefore do not believe in the LNM.

But I don't need any counter-proof to support that view, because it's a non-view. They think there is a Loch Ness Monster. I think they're wrong - my opinion on the matter requires hardly any effort, action or emotional investment or commitment, so could not reasonably be called a 'belief' - not in any way equivalent or comparable to the belief of the people that think there is a LNM.

If, I was someone who felt strongly that not only was there no LNM, but that believing in the LNM was destructive and to be stamped out, and spent significant amounts of effort trying to persuade people on the subject, that approach could require some beliefs.

 

[Atomic Shrimp]

In the real word it is.

Not in the real world I inhabit - it really isn't.

In many cases, it isn't even logically possible to prove a negative, so it's quite an unreasonable expectation that anyone should try.

 

[Atomic Shrimp]

I know

The faith is unreal. No matter how much and how often the theories are wrong the faithful will hang on. Just introcuce a another theory.

What alternative would you like to propose?

 

[Mike375]

Not in the real world I inhabit - it really isn't.

In many cases, it isn't even logically possible to prove a negative, so it's quite an unreasonable expectation that anyone should try.

Does not take much to prove the petrol tank is either empty or full.

Does not take much to prove the bank balance is - And so on and so on.

 

[Mike375]

What alternative would you like to propose?

We already have two alternatives.

Check the end of your post and you will see it had the "born again" flavour, although of course the flavour is from the other side of the apple

 

[Atomic Shrimp]

Does not take much to prove the petrol tank is either empty or full.

Does not take much to prove the bank balance is - And so on and so on.

Yep, that's why I said 'in many cases', not in all of them. It's quite easy to prove a negative, when the assertion is fully scoped and bounded, and where the object in question is expected to be available for observation.

For example, the assertion that right now, there is a large cat on your head - easy to prove false because I have specified the limits of time and place, and you presumably know what a cat would look like, if there was one there.

But lots of other assertions simply cannot be disproven - the assertion that there are no blue dogs - could only be proven false if it were possible to search everywhere, all at once.

And it's this other category that claims about deities seem to inhabit.

 

[Atomic Shrimp]

We already have two alternatives.

Check the end of your post and you will see it had the "born again" flavour, although of course the flavour is from the other side of the apple

Sorry, I don't know which post you mean - please could you elaborate?

 

[Mike375]

But lots of other assertions simply cannot be disproven - the assertion that there are no blue dogs - could only be proven false if it were possible to search everywhere, all at once.

And it's this other category that claims about deities seem to inhabit.

So it is too hard for the atheists and they just take the easy way...they don't believe...sorry....they lack a belief in God because it is too hard to press on.

Seems like God has set up a simple test. He knows who will fail but enjoys watching. What a prick He did say we were made in his image

 

[Rabbie]

So it is too hard for the atheists and they just take the easy way...they don't believe...sorry....they lack a belief in God because it is too hard to press on.

Seems like God has set up a simple test. He knows who will fail but enjoys watching. What a prick He did say we were made in his image

If there was a god and you call him a prick then he would strike you dead so I shall take any further posts from you as proof that there isn't a god who cares about your opinion.

 

[Mike375]

If there was a god and you call him a prick then he would strike you dead so I shall take any further posts from you as proof that there isn't a god who cares about your opinion.

God does not strike you dead for calling him a prick.

But on future postings, are even your current postings real. I think we have an imposter. Why. Well many pages ago the "real Rabbie" made a post along the lines that all postings on this topic should cease.

 

[Rabbie]

God does not strike you dead for calling him a prick.

He struck people dead in the Old Testament for much less serious offences.

But on future postings, are even your current postings real. I think we have an imposter. Why. Well many pages ago the "real Rabbie" made a post along the lines that all postings on this topic should cease.

You may think that. I couldn't possibly comment. Perhaps it was the impostor who posted that?

 

[Mike375]

He struck people dead in the Old Testament for much less serious offences.

But he did not strike Satan dead.

And he did not strike dead those who were preaching the cause.

You may think that. I couldn't possibly comment. Perhaps it was the impostor who posted that?

I don't know. Maybe you deleted it?

 

[Rabbie]

But he did not strike Satan dead.

And he did not strike dead those who were preaching the cause.



I don't know. Maybe you deleted it?

What do you mean? Deleted??

You seem to be suffering from delusions.

 

[Mike375]

What do you mean? Deleted??

You seem to be suffering from delusions.

I said maybe you deleted it. I don't know. I think you are getting paranoid.

 

[Atomic Shrimp]

So it is too hard for the atheists and they just take the easy way...they don't believe...sorry....they lack a belief in God because it is too hard to press on.

Maybe - but if so, is that a problem? Should they feel some sort of obligation to keep looking for something that just doesn't seem (to them) to be there?

 

[Rabbie]

I said maybe you deleted it. I don't know. I think you are getting paranoid.

You said maybe it was deleted without any reason to do so. My comment was a reference (obviously it escaped you) to a TV political dram called "House of Cards". Sorry if you don't understand my humour

 

[Mike375]

Maybe - but if so, is that a problem? Should they feel some sort of obligation to keep looking for something that just doesn't seem (to them) to be there?

Not at all and especially when they have it both ends of the spectrum.

But the bottom line is some are keen atheists and the schools have the Bible, the churches have the tax break so......if they want the changes they have to do the work.

The blokes in Australia gave up after the first refusal for the Bus advertisements. But it is very hard work when you want a movement, while claiming it is not a movement and trying to promote no belief. There is no product to sell.

However, it is atheists who want change. So the weight of proof is on them!!!