True. However, you find most believers aren't people who believe in such phenomena literally. Hence the arguments many atheists use are too simplistic. They lump all people of belief into one basket case. Even those who believe the Earth is 6000years old believe it on a spiritual level and can accept that it is also 4 billion years old. Yeah difficult to grasp, I know, but that is the human mind.However, while one might be able to say that God can't be disproven, one could disprove specific claims of phenomena that intrude on the real world. For example, one can disprove a claim that the earth is only 6000 years old.
Seriously, I am the king of weak comebacks, but that - you should have rather just let it slide...Thanks for the insult. Since you can't argue logically you choose to insult,
how mature of you.
He said that I'm a moron. I should let that slide?Seriously, I am the king of weak comebacks, but that - you should have rather just let it slide...
What he did was to prove that you are wrong and the least you could do was to say, OK fine, you got me there.
Shame on you Pete - I expected more from you.
Fair enough; I'd agree with that.True. However, you find most believers aren't people who believe in such phenomena literally. Hence the arguments many atheists use are too simplistic. They lump all people of belief into one basket case. Even those who believe the Earth is 6000years old believe it on a spiritual level and can accept that it is also 4 billion years old. Yeah difficult to grasp, I know, but that is the human mind.
When you work with people, you have to adjust to that sort of thinking.
Absolutely.In this instance however my argument was more semantic. The school teaches there is no scientific proof for God.
That's all it teaches. To conclude that they are saying that God does not exist and that is what they are teaching
is a fallacy.
Love it - this is needed world wide, i hope other states follow suit..."Atheistical parents will be pleased to hear that humanistic courses of ethics will soon be available in some state schools," Victorian Humanist Society president Stephen Stuart said.
No direct reference to the Bible perhaps, plenty of reference to the god mentioned in the Bible however, and the proof of god requires one to believe that morality can only come from a god. This falls down as there are many evolutional reasons for morality to exist, without the input of a supreme being. It also falls down because Kant says that god - or rather, "God" - is the "Ideal of Reason" when the one thing that theists and nontheists alike can agree on is that God is ineffable.You're not as well read as you think you are...
Has no reference to the Bible.
Philosophy is a big subject my friend, don't confuse it with
Secondly, don't judge people. You know nothing about me. I'm not from your social circle.
And you are confused at least your post shows you to be so.
So you can judge people better in person then? Don't answer, let's not derail the thread further.Also, I will judge you as I see you, which at the moment is what you write on this forum. I also fully understand that many people will only be able to judge me by what they see me write in this forum. I recognise and accept this inherent limitation of net-based communication, and trust that you will too.
They are not drawing a conclusion from the statement. They are saying what many sane people have been saying for centuries, science and religion do not mix. It's like saying that a university is saying "God does not exist" becauseExplain. Where am I misunderstanding the article Peter?
"They will simply say God does not exist" <- should have being "there is no evidence God exists."
That would imply that the person who was reasoning FOR God wanted God to exist. With Kant it wasn't the case. The guy was proving the opposite philosophically and came to the conclusion that God must exist. He didn't want it that way - Kant wasn't even a believer.wishful thinking?
No. You're confusing philosophy with Theology. The two can overlap but they don't have to. There are many schools of philisophy, Greek, Roman (Western),Google Definitions.
- doctrine: a belief (or system of beliefs) accepted as authoritative by some group or school
- the rational investigation of questions about existence and knowledge and ethics
- any personal belief about how to live or how to deal with a situation
- a formal series of statements showing that if one thing is true something else necessarily follows from it
I dont see how Philosphical Proofs can be used as proof that God exists.
As the philosophies cant be proven.
Isn't this like quoting to Bible to prove the Bible?
This isn't as simple as that. Do yourself a favour and read a more detailed source. This discussion isn't about that.No direct reference to the Bible perhaps, plenty of reference to the god mentioned in the Bible however, and the proof of god requires one to believe that morality can only come from a god.
Torture something for it's own sake. The Bible is a morality manual and not a historical book. Everything in it has to be contextualised to it's current age. Back in the days of Stone Age or Bronze Age if you want to be pedantic, I won't source this as I don't care, laws were of a particular harshness. As people settled down and became more tolerant they changed their understanding of various things in the Bible. However, certain core messages remained the same in understanding. You ask HOW DO PEOPLE KNOW?Torture the Bible long enough and you can get it to say anything.
Which are also common to all men. Hence the Church has said that God made all men moral, even disbelievers. However not everyone was 100% moral and not 100% of the time. The Mayans slaughtered thousands of captives in human sacrifices for example. However on a simple level, they may have meant well. It was a nasty way to show it - I agree.Since proto-Hebrews originate from the Egyptian Haribu tribe (during the bronze age).. I dont think Israel or the Jewish religion existed in the stone age. Most of the OT is a mixture of Egyptian and Summerian laws and practices.
Well an extreme harsh form of life - in the desert with limited resources withFrom theology to a police state in one sentence. I live Christian analogies and metaphors
If you attended Catechism as you should have done you'd have said Amen,Ahmen!
Some Christians, eg Catholics believe that the Holy Spirit, the 3rd part of the Trinity of God - guides mankind and the Church. Elements of the scriptures which come more to prominence by - call it even osmosis (lol) are considered such. Yes I know its difficult for some to understand this. That's why Christians believe in a 'Living God' - you know - having a personal relationship with God. Some churches attach more formality to this, others less.And he has written none since then? Whats the complete list of criteria to be identified as "Gods word"? How can I accept the authority on whats in the Bible?
How do you A) Identify something is divinely inspired and B) Why did God stop writing?
This discussion is about you being taken in by a media person's attempt to kickstart debate through misrepresentation. The only person saying that there isn't a "God" in this discussion is the journalist who wrote the original headline.This isn't as simple as that. Do yourself a favour and read a more detailed source. This discussion isn't about that.