Maynman:

That's why I call agnostics, theists sympathizers, when they are done sympathizing they will come around.
When the question of gods come in, it's either yes or no which is theism or atheism, any other thing is just extra.

And the funny thing is theists don't give a fvck about the label. U dont believe in god, u r a doomed atheist. End of story. In fact, amongst christians here, if you don't belong to their sect or denom, you're an atheist. We see this especially between DTruthSpeaker and Maxindhouse

gisevak:

The first human is an example of a creation

Huh! What is evident about creation in a human? Try to be specific

gisevak:

do you have any proof that nature and its laws are not creations?

You made the allegations. The onus to provide proof lies with you

LordReed:


LoLz. Nice attempt to shift the burden of proof to me. You are the one making the claim that they are evidence of a creation so it is up to you to supply the proof that they are.

Exactly

KnownUnknown:


What first human?
What evidence of creations?
Point out any natural thing that’s in the process of being “created”.

Dude is a regular theist with the cloak of agnosticism

gisevak:


Example of nature is Human. Do you agree nature exists? YES [/b]OR [b]NO

Please what is 'nature'? I need definitions

gisevak:

Maybe you have any in the process of being created. We can all see the trees, humans and many more are creations. So what are you saying?

Who created the big baobab tree in my village? And how was it created

gisevak:


Natural creations that include mountains, ecosystems, and even living organisms; Are this not evidence of creation to you? Or Are these not natural creations?

You said creation didn't exist! Are you kidding yourself or someone else?

A tree was once a seed. So in effects it wasn't created, it grew!
Mountains too are results of volcanic activities, waves etc. They weren't created.
So I don't know what you're yammering about

gisevak:

Please explain to me the existence of humans. Do not deviate from the op position.

We probably evolved from unicellular organisms. About the origin of this unicellular, I don't know
There are abounding evidence about evolution
If you say stuff was created, u need to give evidence

gisevak:

"Natural creation" typically refers to the process by which entities, or others come into existence through natural means.

Explain 'natural means'
Thus by this definition there is artificial creation

jaephoenix:

We probably evolved from unicellular organisms. About the origin of this unicellular, I don't know

I think people are just hesitant to say it all started and will end here. They keep holding out hope.
I think life on earth started here and didn’t originate from anywhere else.
Life is the result of the interaction between the sun and the earth with the moon also playing a role. The unicellular organisms originated here and evolved here.

Look at trees for example, which are attached to the earth and a very much a part of the earth. They didn’t originate from anywhere and are the result of the earth and energy from the sun. Same goes for all life on earth.

gisevak:


A simple analogy is this: I saw a mansion at a place. And I couldn't see the builder. Does it just make sense to say there is no builder? Is it logical to conclude that the builder of such a mansion doesn't exist? What cause the natural process?

We know how buildings come into place. Matter of fact, we have seen buildings being built and what's more, the building process is well documented.
Do you know the process in creating a human? Have you seen a human created and what are the process of creating 'the first human'?

jaephoenix:

Exactly

And till now he still hasn't.

jaephoenix:

So you completed the spectrum. Interesting…
Like I said in that thread, agnosticism is a spectrum with you on the atheist end of it while AOO1, Triplechoice, Workch and that op scattered on it. That op in that thread is at the theist end. And also this op: A step away from theism

I don't usually shy away from the title "atheist", but for a lot of people, the word doesn't mean the same thing it means for me.

To me, an atheist is someone who lacks the belief in a god/gods. A stunning number of other people see atheism as the claim that god/gods do not, and cannot exist.

Because of that, I tend to identify as agnostic, to avoid the headache of people misrepresenting my position.

Dtruthspeaker:


Simple.
Because every reasonable person knows that Laws don't make themselves and they are made by A Creator who has set how He wants His creation to be.

Everyone knows that!

Lollest DTruthSpeaker!
Are you saying 'the creator' postulated the laws of thermodynamics?
Are you also aware some of these laws are flawed. Are you saying 'the creator' made flawed laws?
Like I always tell you, stay away from scientific or philosophical discourses. You simply don't have the resources to engage in them

Wilgrea7:


To me, an atheist is someone who lacks the belief in a god/gods. A stunning number of other people see atheism as the claim that god/gods do not, and cannot exist.

Some people's gods are stones, water, tree etc, and they all exist.
But if you are talking about monotheistic gods, then they only exist inside books that they were written on.
Also, "god" is a title not a person, is like saying "does teacher exist" "teacher" does not exist, we have people that teach that are called teachers, same with this god, which "thing" are you calling a god that exist, what qualifies this "thing" to be a god?
all theisitic religions have a specific name of their deity.

Wilgrea7:


I don't usually shy away from the title "atheist", but for a lot of people, the word doesn't mean the same thing it means for me.

To me, an atheist is someone who lacks the belief in a god/gods. A stunning number of other people see atheism as the claim that god/gods do not, and cannot exist.

Because of that, I tend to identify as agnostic, to avoid the headache of people misrepresenting my position.

Does lack of belief equate to denial of facts?
Lemme break it down. If you say I as an atheist 'lack' belief in hsgdjc, are you saying there is actually evidence that hsgdjc exists but I simply lack such evidence?

gisevak:

Which evidence are you looking for while we see natural creations such as trees and many more? You are a creation!

Trees aren't created!
You lack simple scientific knowledge judging by your posts

Dtruthspeaker:


Yeah! And matter and so called "energy" are things which create themselves right?

There's still debates about their origins. But if u say its your favorite god that created them, u have to provide proof

Emusan:


Are you part of that 'WE'?

Just say you're waiting for your atheist gods to tell you what to believe on that

Who are the 'atheist gods'?

jaephoenix:

Who are the 'atheist gods'?

The ones telling you everything you believe about Atheist

Freksy:


If you work into a production facility that is fully automated, observe as raw materials are processed and transformed to finished products, I am sure you would not walk away with the conclusion that the products are selfmade simply because no human facility operator is in sight.

Consider the earth, with all the energy and materials in it, as being on auto mode for procreation and reproduction.

Take a deeper look at various reproduction processes and the things involved.

Whats your time

Dtruthspeaker:


Fallacy of asking the impossible.

Everything here is concerned about discoveriing the truth of the begining of our life and world.

AND NOT ABOUT DISCOVERING THE WORLD OF OUR WORLD. THIS PART IS OUT OF SCOPE AND A FORAY INTO MADNESS!

Lol. Stay away from philosophical discourses. You need to think first

jaephoenix:

Lol. Stay away from philosophical discourses. You need to think first

😂

Freksy:


Can you quote where I said the creation and creator are the same?

Every factory is owned by someone.

The earth as a giant factory belongs to someone too.

Who is this someone?

Maynman:

Some people's gods are stones, water, tree etc, and they all exist.
But if you are talking about monotheistic gods, then they only exist inside books that they were written on.
Also, "god" is a title not a person, is like saying "does teacher exist" "teacher" does not exist, we have people that teach that are called teachers, same with this god, which "thing" are you calling a god that exist, what qualifies this "thing" to be a god?
all theisitic religions have a specific name of their deity.

Exactly... the word "god" is a title. I was referring more specifically to the title that tends to imply a sort of conscious higher being, or beings as the reason for the universe.

jaephoenix:

Does lack of belief equate to denial of facts?
Lemme break it down. If you say I as an atheist 'lack' belief in hsgdjc, are you saying there is actually evidence that hsgdjc exists but I simply lack such evidence?

Not quite. I think it depends on the definition of hsgdjc.. in regard to god, the title, when most people use the word, they refer to some sort of higher human-like (for some reason) conscious being/beings responsible for creating or causing the universe.

The issue with the claim of a god is that the information we would need to verify what exactly caused our universe lies outside the universe.. and that's even assuming there's an outside.

we know our current universe began 14 billion years ago... or should I say expanded from its minute form via the big bang.

The claims about a god/gods usually fall before that, for example, people may claim a god is the agent that created the infinitesimal point from which the universe emerged. Others may claim a god/gods is the reason why any sort of thing, be it things like inflation and whatnot would exist at all.

Of course, there's no way to currently prove that, neither is there any sort of evidence to suggest that the universe was caused by such a thing... and as I've addressed in my thread on complexity, a god wouldn't really answer the question of why something exists rather than nothing.

Also, when i use the word god in this context, I'm not referring to any specific religious deity, but rather the title and what it usually entails for most people in regard to the creation of the universe.

Wilgrea7:


Exactly... the word "god" is a title. I was referring more specifically to the title that tends to imply a sort of conscious higher being, or beings as the reason for the universe.

"Conscious higher being" reeks of human Imagination.
You can't have being without non being.
Universe is a Being, If this higher BEING can exist, why can't universe which is BEING simply exist?

jaephoenix:

Lol. Stay away from philosophical discourses. You need to think first

Only a mad people embark on journeys with no destination or end. Even philosophy has an end.

Even Einstein identified 2 things that do not have an end.

Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.

Obviously by his statement human stupidity of pursuing endless philosophyings is even greater than the universe.

jaephoenix:

There's still debates about their origins. But if u say its your favorite god that created them, u have to provide proof

It is proven already. AS CONCERNING US AND OUR WORLD, THINGS DO NOT CREATE THEMSELVES..

THEY ARE ALWAYS CREATED AND BROUGHT INTO EXISTENCE BECAUSE A PERSON CREATED THEM.

NO FURTHER REASONABLE QUERY AFTER THIS.

jaephoenix:

Lollest DTruthSpeaker!
Are you saying 'the creator' postulated the laws of thermodynamics?

I am saying A Creator who has set how He wants His creations to be.

jaephoenix:

Are you also aware some of these laws are flawed. Are you saying 'the creator' made flawed laws?
Like I always tell you, stay away from scientific or philosophical discourses. You simply don't have the resources to engage in them

OFF Point! The topic ain't about "things you call flaws in law but about Creators and The Law that creations can never create themselves.

So Off Point! Your philosophy is failure because again Law.

THERE IS NO VALID ARGUMENT OR PHILOSOPHY AGAINST THE TRUTH!

jaephoenix:

And the funny thing is theists don't give a fvck about the label. U dont believe in god, u r a doomed atheist. End of story. In fact, amongst christians here, if you don't belong to their sect or denom, you're an atheist. We see this especially between DTruthSpeaker and Maxindhouse

This is not entirely correct because.

1.) It is impossible to not believe in God and it is already long proven that those who are antiGod (atheist) are people who are simply antiGod because God stops and condemns them for all the evil they do and wish to do, among other reasons.

So, it is clear that it is not that people do not believe in God, rather it is a refusal/vendetta to believe in God.

As is proven people generally do not believe in aliens and shit but you don't see them crazily screaming even to point of resorting to lies in attack of those who support alienism.

It is just a pure guilt ridden person who stoops to the denial of claiming unbelief in God.

2). And it is known that demons are evil doing spirits which jws anf Max and you atheists have been caught doing hence the call out.