Atheist, n.

Originally posted by lausey
If you knew what you were talking about and not contradictory, then you wouldn't be able to be tripped up.

My purpose isn't for my amusement. I just don't feel comfortable with people propagating BS.

OK, so what have I said, that contradicts something else that I have said........because I dont know what this is all about!

Originally posted by vishvahetu
Advanced physics doesnt explain the universe at all, but invents words to support their speculations, postulations, and baseless therories.

This is just pure ignorance; If it was all just “speculations, postulations, and baseless therories” then no modern technology wouldn't work. Don't you know that the equations of physics explain many things besides the evolution etc of our universe?

Originally posted by lausey
Its difficult to explain the creation of the universe in plain english, because there are many words you havent heard before. (its in advanced physics)

Lol. My thoughts exactly. What would he know about the creation of the universe? -he doesn't even understand modern physics. Does he really think he knows better than all the greatest minds in the world!

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
Lol. My thoughts exactly. What would he know about the creation of the universe? -he doesn't even understand modern physics. Does he really think he knows better than all the greatest minds in the world!

You clearly didn't read my post, because I said I dont have any disagreement with the technology sciences........but when science talks about creation and the origins of life, and the existence and source of everything, then I say its all speculation and baseless theories, which it is, and they are very dishonest about those departments of knowledge, because they have no way of knowing, and they still put forward their false assumptions, because they think they are the keepers of the truth....which they aren,t.

For goodness sake, you say everything has come about by random accident, "and you do say this" because matter cannot do what matter does, without the spiritual component, which you reject......this is silly.

Originally posted by vishvahetu
You clearly didn't read my post, because I said I dont have any disagreement with the technology sciences........but when science talks about creation and the origins of life, and the existence and source of everything, then I say its all speculation and baseless theories, which it is, and they are very dishonest about those departments of knowledge, beca ...[text shortened]... ot do what matter does, without the spiritual component, which you reject......this is silly.

No. Wild speculation and baseless assumptions is almost all we are getting from you since the first day you started posting here. You attempt a Brahminical revival by means of promoting to the hilt the supremacy of your religion over any other religious, scientific and philosophic approach. And, when you see that the supposed divinity of the Vedas is debunked whilst at the same time the authority of the religious personages of your religion is discarded, you play the card “…God is the author of the Vedanta Sutra” and you insist that, therefore, “…Vedanta Sutra is the absolute truth” because “…God wrote it”. You are just unable to see that this circular wannabe “argument” does not hold; and then you keep up insulting your fellow debaters who dispute your preaching along with the authority of your supposed “holy scripture”, calling them “dishonest” and insisting that they are asking you “insincere questions”. Furthermore, when your fellow debaters try to show you that they merely want real arguments from you in order to accept your theses, you explode and you attack them fiercely because you suffer of the delusion that whoever disagrees with you is doing so simply because s/he wants to “wind you up”. You are herenow so assimilated from the tangled forest you brought up out of your own mind, that you call “dishonest” whoever is unable to see it;

Blind religious preaching, discrimination, fanaticism, lack of education, hardcore religious fundamentalism and absence of deep respect to your brothers is not the attitude of a Brahmachari. Methinks you have to work harder
😵

Originally posted by black beetle
No. Wild speculation and baseless assumptions is almost all we are getting from you since the first day you started posting here. You attempt a Brahminical revival by means of promoting to the hilt the supremacy of your religion over any other religious, scientific and philosophic approach. And, when you see that the supposed divinity of the Vedas is de ...[text shortened]... pect to your brothers is not the attitude of a Brahmachari. Methinks you have to work harder
😵

You have taken to Buddhism, to give your foolish atheism some false facade, but if you put lipstick on a pig.....its still a pig.

I am one, who you cannot fool with your mumbo jumbo talk of annihilation of everything, to simply avoid everything.

Originally posted by vishvahetu
You have taken to Buddhism, to give your foolish atheism some false facade, but if you put lipstick on a pig.....its still a pig.

I am one, who you cannot fool with your mumbo jumbo talk of annihilation of everything, to simply avoid everything.

Your display of knowledge is breath taking! Did you know that Thomas Edison was an atheist?

Originally posted by vishvahetu
You have taken to Buddhism, to give your foolish atheism some false facade, but if you put lipstick on a pig.....its still a pig.

I am one, who you cannot fool with your mumbo jumbo talk of annihilation of everything, to simply avoid everything.

If my atheism was in fact stupidity and your specific theism intelligence, you would have had the essense of my post refuted in full instead of failing at all to offer a justified reply
😵

Originally posted by vishvahetu
You clearly didn't read my post, because I said I dont have any disagreement with the technology sciences........but when science talks about creation and the origins of life, and the existence and source of everything, then I say its all speculation and baseless theories, which it is, and they are very dishonest about those departments of knowledge, beca ...[text shortened]... ot do what matter does, without the spiritual component, which you reject......this is silly.

“...or goodness sake, you say everything has come about by random accident, ...”

nope.


“..."and you do say this" because matter cannot do what matter does, without the spiritual component, which you reject......this is silly. ...”

?
what language is that? “ matter cannot do what matter does” is a contradiction that I never said and what the hell is this “ spiritual component”?

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
“...or goodness sake, you say everything has come about by random accident, ...”

nope.


“..."and you do say this" because matter cannot do what matter does, without the spiritual component, which you reject......this is silly. ...”

?
what language is that? “ matter cannot do what matter does” is a contradiction that I never said and what the hell is this “ spiritual component”?

Matter takes birth, it grows, it reproduces, it dwindles then dies......and in between the matter (body) creates stuff and does stuff,...........none of this can happen without the spiritual soul, the living being.the life within,.... which you reject.

And why do you reject the soul........because you cant see it!

Where would science be today, if it rejected everything it could not see?

So you see your rejection is not because of intellect, but lack of it, and its dishonest to do that.

You could at least say, there is a God, but I dont care for God.....at least that would be honest.

Originally posted by vishvahetu
Matter takes birth, it grows, it reproduces, it dwindles then dies......and in between the matter (body) creates stuff and does stuff,...........none of this can happen without the spiritual soul, the living being.the life within,.... which you reject.

And why do you reject the soul........because you cant see it!

Where would science be today, if it ...[text shortened]... u could at least say, there is a God, but I dont care for God.....at least that would be honest.

You provide reproducible evidence for a supernatural god, and I will believe it. No one has done it up to now, and, frankly, if any one could do it, I am confident it won't be the likes of you. You claim there is a god so prove it. You have faith in god but admit you have no proof. By the way, did god reveal himself personally to you, or did you learn about him from other humans? Be honest and brief.

Originally posted by 667joe
You provide reproducible evidence for a supernatural god, and I will believe it. No one has done it up to now, and, frankly, if any one could do it, I am confident it won't be the likes of you. You claim there is a god so prove it. You have faith in god but admit you have no proof. By the way, did god reveal himself personally to you, or did you learn about him from other humans? Be honest and brief.

You are mistaken 667joe, vishva's beliefs are perfect...because they come from a perfect source...which are perfect because he believes them to be so. Now clearly a source of knowledge that was supposed to be perfect would be less perfect if the person reading them had a false understanding...ergo vishvahetu has a perfect understanding of his source...and for this knowledge to be perfect, the source itself cannot be improved whence we conclude the vedas are indeed perfect!!!


circular reasoning 1,
667joe 0

:]

Originally posted by 667joe
You provide reproducible evidence for a supernatural god, and I will believe it. No one has done it up to now, and, frankly, if any one could do it, I am confident it won't be the likes of you. You claim there is a god so prove it. You have faith in god but admit you have no proof. By the way, did god reveal himself personally to you, or did you learn about him from other humans? Be honest and brief.

Iam always honest, but often never brief......material apparatus (these eyes) can never see God, but spiritual apparatus can see God.

The spiritual apparatus is your purified mind and heart.

Without purifying the mind and heart, the mind and heart will remain material apparatus.

There is a spiritual process for turning the material apparatus into spiritual apparatus.

If you are willing to follow the process to do this, then you will see God, with your purified mind and heart.

For the honest person, they can appreciated God Creator with their material eyes, by appreciating Gods creation, all around them.

Originally posted by 667joe
You provide reproducible evidence for a supernatural god, and I will believe it. No one has done it up to now, and, frankly, if any one could do it, I am confident it won't be the likes of you. You claim there is a god so prove it. You have faith in god but admit you have no proof. By the way, did god reveal himself personally to you, or did you learn about him from other humans? Be honest and brief.

error in transmission

Rule number one, I was always told: 'Don;t get involved with cross religious \ Darwin'istic' \ scientific rhetorical arguments'...the 'rules' were effectively written 100's of years ago, so no one will accept each others comments and just who will effectively alter one anothers convictions. The religious say, 'I have 'seen, I feel it, I am Blessed, I need no proof'..the evolutionaries, 'but it's right before your eyes, the evidence is all around you...the evidence is a part of you,' whilst the scientist sits, pondering his Trump card, wondering what kind of buffoon can accept all this.. More so, each 'party' is likely to only abstractly alienate the other....OR is that just an easy way out 😛