Maynman:

Prove your OWN CONCEPT.

"Well,my own concept is that "creator" refers to a divine being or a higher power that is believed to have created the univerese"

gisevak:

Again, I don't have evidence or proof for a creator or creators neither do i have proof to 2 the evidence of a creator? Can you provide your proof now? Atheist!Lol

gisevak:


Do you have any names to add to it? I might not have any name for things like that other than "natural creation", so you might just give me the name that best fits it. Natural creations refer to the formation or emergence of elements, entities, or phenomena through natural processes.

LordReed:


I call them natural. Adding creation is an attempt to define something into reality. Essentially you are saying a creator exists because you call them creations.

gisevak:


I am not saying creator exist or not. What i am saying is that we can see "natural" as you called it just as we can see a painting on the wall. It is not logical to reject something we know nothing about. I am not saying you should accept there is a creator or not. But, don't you think it sound illogical to base your belief on false theories. You should at least not be in a hurry to make conclusion about things you know nothing about.

jaephoenix:

Like I always thought, you don't have a comeback on those questions. Clearly shows how poor your mental acuity is

jaephoenix:

1. Why do you think its impossible to not believe god?

jaephoenix:

There's literally millions of atheists existing. Matter of fact, your chatting with one! ...

jaephoenix:

if at all you're indeed a lawyer, I'd like to know if you engage in courtroom battles. You're so piss poor in brilliant exchanges

gisevak:


Let us take this analogy: I am not a sea diver, and so I don't have the capacity to go inside the bottom of the Pacific Ocean. I have tried to go deep, but I lack the capacity to do so. And I have a brother or someone that can go that deep into the ocean, or probably must have gone inside. And someone told me there was gold at the bottom of the sea. What would you do to verify the truth? So I lack the capacity to even reject the Creator. You can go ahead and provide that fact or books that claim there is no creator with 100 percent proof. I am open-minded about the Creator.

gisevak:

No! I still lack belief in any known god or gods. But I am open-minded to the existence of the Creator because there is not enough evidence to disapprove of or approve of the gods. But my point is that there is more evidence of the existence of a creator than not. It's better if I am on neutral ground.

budaatum:


What you observe as created, is what exists and that you assume must have been created. And you assume that because you assume that things that exist must have been created by a creator and can not consider any other way that things might have come into existence.

Mount Everest
Home to our planet’s highest peak (29,035 feet; 8,850 meters) Mount Everest the standard to which all other mountains are compared. The Nepalese name for the mountain is Sagarmatha: “mother of the universe.” Everest’s geological story began 40 million years ago when the Indian subcontinent began a slow-motion collision with Asia. The edges of two continents jammed together and pushed up the massive ridges that make up the Himalayas today.

budaatum:
Your brother here would be the writers of the book they wrote and that you believe to represent what is inside the bottom of the Pacific Ocean.

And what if someone more qualified or up to date than your brother comes back from the bottom of the Pacific Ocean and tells you different to what your brother told you? Do you choose to believe one or the other or just continue to believe your brother instead of seeking to know with your own heart and soul and mind?

budaatum:
Your brother here would be the writers of the book they wrote and that you believe to represent what is inside the bottom of the Pacific Ocean.

And what if someone more qualified or up to date than your brother comes back from the bottom of the Pacific Ocean and tells you different to what your brother told you? Do you choose to believe one or the other or just continue to believe your brother instead of seeking to know with your own heart and soul and mind?

gisevak:


I would like to see someone who has gone so deep to find out if the gold is truly there or not. That means that person has the capacity to know the truth.
To be honest and factual, I don't think there is anyone who has the capacity to verify the truth now. Nobody has ever performed any scientific experiments or something related to show that what we see is created or not. Or whether there is a creator or creators or not. Most are just making what I call logical guesses. I might be wrong, so prove me wrong if anyone has such capacity.

gisevak:

Firstly, this doesn't answer the questions I asked; the answer to the first question should indicate steps to take to find the truth about the gold. I probably expect you to employ the service of a diver to go that deep into the Pacific Ocean. The diver has the capacity to find out the truth himself without employing anybody, while you don't.
Secondly, you have not provided any books or facts that prove 100 percent that creators exist or not. I don't think you can even show or bring such facts or proof forward.

budaatum:


The diver would not return and tell me to believe he found gold. Instead, he'd show me the gold he found so I know he found gold.

And I'm not diving to find gold for you. Do your own diving is what I suggest, instead of not diving at all and believing there's gold deep in the Pacific Ocean.

budaatum:


So, you choose to make a logical guess and believe instead of seeking to know? Isn't that what devils are written to do too and tremble while at it? Why emulate what makes devil's tremble?

I'm not going to bother trying to prove you wrong because that would be tantamount to trying to make you believe me instead, and I'd be depriving you of a learning opportunity. Do your own asking and knocking and seeking yourself. You may or may not find God but you'd learn a lot through seeking.

If you are a book believer, I'd suggest you read more and research the history of the book you believe in.

gisevak:


Has the diver gone that deep now? Since you know that the diver has not gone that deep to bring the gold, why rush to the conclusion that there is no gold? You have not even gone that deep into the ocean, and neither do you have the capacity to do so. Why conclude? It's highly illogical to hurriedly conclude something that you have not verified.

gisevak:


Do you know someone who is agnostic about some views? You're not speaking with a religious person; bear this in mind. Everybody must not be a Christian or other theistic religion before they point out your wrongfulness. Who is making logical guesses here? Someone who says a creator doesn't exist without proving it or someone who says creation doesn't exist without proving evidence, and there are many more of your conclusions. And I choose to be neutral or not to draw conclusions based on those views. I think we currently don't have the capacity to know the truth; hence, I remained neutral.

gisevak:


Has the diver gone that deep now? Since you know that the diver has not gone that deep to bring the gold, why rush to the conclusion that there is no gold? You have not even gone that deep into the ocean, and neither do you have the capacity to do so. Why conclude? It's highly illogical to hurriedly conclude something that you have not verified.

budaatum:


Now, if only you were agnostic about buda, but I guess you don't know anything about me and are making up things to believe about my capacity and how long I've spent just as you are with gods.

Sir, I have gone that deep myself and do not need to rely on a diver as far as gods are concerned. It's all in books, which you can read if you can be bothered to get your hands on them, which is now so much more easier than when I began because you can now find loads on the internet.

budaatum:


There is no problem being agnostic especially since you don't have sufficient information about the history and creation of gods. It is however not agnostic nor neutral to believe gods exist.

As for not having the capacity, kindly speak for yourself. Some have not only sought and knocked and asked with their own hearts and souls and minds, they first had Jesus open their eyes too so they can see.

LordReed:


What inspired the diver to dive in the first place? Did the diver think oh there's a 50/50 chance there's gold at the bottom of the ocean? Do you think that is how mineral exploration works? You just take a chance without any concrete data?

gisevak:


This is a result of not digesting and understanding what you quoted. You just committed the Red Herring Fallacy; you are simply diverting from the point.
What I am saying there is about who has the capacity to verify facts and who doesn't. We all know that if I had the capacity to enter a fire without being burned, I would go inside any fire incident to rescue people, even if people lied to me or not that they were in the burning house. I have nothing to lose; I am capable. Do you have anybody capable of proving or disapproving the existence of a creator or creators?

LordReed:


LoLz. I am asking you on what basis do even begin to ask the question. Obviously you the one who is incapable of digesting simple things. You really need to learn how not to project your failings unto others.

gisevak:


Many dodge to prove or disapprove of the existence of a universe creator because they don't have the capacity to do so. I won't blame anybody for this, but what I feel people are ignorant about is drawing conclusions about the existence of a creator. We can see this when atheists argue and when religious people argue as well. They are all chasing the shadow and making both logical and illogical guesses. None has proved his side by any proofs.
 
If you have capacity, then prove that the creator does not exist. Don't come here and say that the burden of proof typically lies with the party making a positive claim or assertion, because the burden of proof can be in a negative context too.

gisevak:


Many dodge to prove or disapprove of the existence of the true Boombum because they don't have the capacity to do so. I won't blame anybody for this, but what I feel people are ignorant about is drawing conclusions about the existence of Boombum. We can see this when theists argue and when religious people argue as well. They are all chasing the shadow and making both logical and illogical guesses. None has proved his side by any proofs.
 
If you have capacity, then prove that Boombum does not exist. Don't come here and say that the burden of proof typically lies with the party making a positive claim or assertion, because the burden of proof can be in a negative context too.

LordReed:


Oga simple question on what basis do you ask if there is a creator or not? Very simple question.

gisevak:

What do you mean by this question? On what basis? My basis is an agnostic point of view about a creator or creators. My stand on proof of the existence of a universe creator is inherently difficult or impossible to answer definitively. I don't have proof to approve or disapprove of the existence of a creator.

gisevak:


Do you or anyone else have the ability to prove or disapprove that the creator does not exist? You can point to anyone who has the capacity to do so. Why bring biblical Jesus here after I told you that I am agnostic?

budaatum:


The stories of Jesus teach quite a lot, is why I bring it here. One most important teaching of his is the use of the senses to ask and knock and seek instead of thinking you are incapable of using your senses to do the requisite research.

As for a creator, you might as well be asking me to prove to you that the spaghetti monster or Russell's Teapot do not exist. Most would inform you that it is you who thinks a thing exists that should prove its existence. But I shall not bother asking you to since you claim it is merely a belief and not something you actually know.

As for your agnosticism, I am certain it pertains to particular gods and not all gods, unless you are equally agnostic about Sango and Sopona too. Do tell, are you?

LordReed:


On what basis do you ask about a creator? Did the thought just jump into your head?

gisevak:

Read through my quotes and posts here and you would find your answers. I have answer this here.