2 edits
@kingdavid403 said
So you truly think that you, everyone you know, life around us and in us, the cosmos, etc. Are all just a fluke? Without God, everything would be just a fluke. What say you? I say everyone knows whether they admit Him or not.
1 edit
@kingdavid403 saidI don't know what the origin of the universe is. I understand that you attribute it to your particular God figure. I am open-minded about there being a creator being. But I am an agnostic atheist when it comes to what people claim are their "revealed" religions. The last line of your post above is not true. It is something that has been claimed here on this forum many times by various religionists. It's just silly.
So you truly think that you, everyone you know, life around us and in us, the cosmos, etc. Are all just a fluke?Without God, everything would be just a fluke.What say you?I say everyone knows whether they admit Him or not.
1 edit
@kingdavid403 said
FMF: I am open minded about there being a creator being.
KingDavid403: Why is this?
@kingdavid403 saidBecause, clearly, none of us can know for sure. It is an area for speculation and conjecture ~ aspiration even ~ and therefore firmly in the realm of subjectivity. My subjective reaction to this is to be open-minded.
Why is this?
1 edit
@kingdavid403 said
'Because you have known Him and have seen Him (paraphrased).'
I am an agnostic atheist. While the universe - and things like human consciousness - may well be the strongest evidence that theists have for their assertions about a creator and their various religions, I am open-minded about others' speculations.
I am also unaffected it by the things that people attribute to their God figures because I have found no credible reason to believe the assertions made by such followers of "revealed" religions.
I do not believe I have "known" your particular God figure ~ regardless of how certain you are that I have, nor do I believe I have "seen" "Him".
@fmf saidNot even god I would imagine!
I thought this kind of rhetoric was a thing of the past now that sonship has (apparently) left.
Who thinks it is a persuasive assertion?
Doesn't Jesus say "Whoever believes in me ... la di da ..."
Clearly he doesn't think everyone does!
And Hebrews;
And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to
him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.
2 edits
-Removed-I have seen it used as a debating fall back position designed to look like a smarter move when the argument is more or less lost.
In this case, it was used as a TROLL move, and not much more.
lol...It clearly worked too. lol... 😆
However, in my opinion, I feel there is some truths in my statements. Nothing absolute.
@kingdavid403 saidI guess you mean that some part of the atheist (no matter how small or hidden) thinks there must be a God.
I have seen it used as a debating fall back position designed to look like a smarter move when the argument is more or less lost.
In this case, it was used as a TROLL move, and not much more.
lol...It clearly worked too. lol... 😆
However, in my opinion, I feel there is some truths in my statements. Nothing absolute.
The problem is, such a way of thinking goes both ways. I would be just as confident in an assertion that 'nobody' believes in God 100%. (That there is a small or hidden amount of doubt).
If nobody is 100% atheist then nobody is 100% theist. Alternatively, take the atheist at their word when they say they don't believe in God. To do otherwise is a little patronizing.
4 edits
@ghost-of-a-duke saidAs I previously stated Sir Duke: " it was used as a TROLL move, and not much more."
I guess you mean that some part of the atheist (no matter how small or hidden) thinks there must be a God.
The problem is, such a way of thinking goes both ways. I would be just as confident in an assertion that 'nobody' believes in God 100%. (That there is a small or hidden amount of doubt).
If nobody is 100% atheist then nobody is 100% theist. Alternatively, ...[text shortened]... eist at their word when they say they don't believe in God. To do otherwise is a little patronizing.
I apologize for any offense to others. That was not my intention when I made these posts while tired and somewhat annoyed.
I somewhat agree with your other statements also. Somewhat 🙂
I honestly do not believe I or others are above or below anyone here, or elsewhere.
No one knows their belief, or non-belief in God, better than themselves.
@kingdavid403 saidI agree with that last sentiment. People also come and go in their relationship with the 'divine' as they trundle through life. It's admittedly unlikely, but possible we could completely exchange places in 20 years, me the tamborine shaker (no offense intended) and you the hardened atheist with a penchant for chocolate.
As I previously stated Sir Duke: " it was used as a TROLL move, and not much more."
I apologize for any offense to others. That was not my intention when I made these posts while tired and somewhat annoyed.
I somewhat agree with your other statements also. Somewhat 🙂
I honestly do not believe I or others are above or below anyone here, or elsewhere.
No one knows their belief, or non-belief in God, better than themselves.
1 edit
@kingdavid403 saidIf you are now saying "no one knows their belief, or non-belief in God, better than themselves", why then do you insist that "everyone believes in God whether they admit it or not"?
I honestly do not believe I or others are above or below anyone here, or elsewhere.
No one knows their belief, or non-belief in God, better than themselves.
3 edits
@fmf saidWho did I insist this to?
If you are now saying "no one knows their belief, or non-belief in God, better than themselves", why then do you insist that "everyone believes in God whether they admit it or not"?
you.
Why?
To counter-troll you and piss you off.
Did it work?
Oh yeah! LOL... Just look at the tangent you went on. 🙂 lol...
Anything else? 🙂