If it's proven there's no god

The Near Genius

Fort Gordon

Joined: 24 Jan 11
Moves: 13644

11 Apr 15

Originally posted by finnegan
I can imagine you not existing.

😀

I can imagine you not existing too. However, that was not the point I was making.

~~Duchess64~~

Joined: 08 Jun 07
Moves: 2120

11 Apr 15

-4

This post is unavailable

Please refer to our posting guidelines

Joined: 16 Jan 07
Moves: 95105

11 Apr 15

The post that was quoted here has been removed

i beg to differ, i have both supported you arguments in the past (especially in the debates forum) and disagreed.

i would go as far as saying that i generally agree with the points you are make (but not always)..but usually disagree with the tone of your posts.

if you have a different impression...then i would like to categorically state here that i stellspalfie usually agree with the points duchess64 makes...although dislike the way she/he goes about making those points.

Joined: 31 May 06
Moves: 1795

11 Apr 15

The post that was quoted here has been removed

And yet somehow you seem to keep replying to my posts... [and keep replying to my posts,
you've replied to more since I started typing]

This isn't taking the 'high road' and ignoring someone you have 'disdain' for.

This is throwing a hissy fit.

And despite your claim that I was 'limiting the context' by asking for examples
of my supposed dishonesty and lying in THIS thread, you are evidently claiming
that my posts in THIS THREAD are dishonest.

And while I have multiply confirmed that my posts are rude... You have provided
no evidence at all that they are in any way dishonest, or contain lies or falsehoods.

You on the other hand, have been consistently claiming my dishonesty despite no
evidence that I have been or am dishonest.

There is a word to describe that behaviour... Actually two words.

Dishonesty and Hypocrisy.

Googlefudge has disingenuously implied that he holds discussions in
respectful terms with Suzianne.

Actually I said "I can hold discussions with Suzianne" which is true. I didn't say that any
[or all] were respectful. Whether they are or not will depend on the discussion and the
point of view. That I have discussions with Suzianne is not however a matter of opinion,
hers OR mine. It's a matter of record, you can go read them.

Googlefudge presumably will keep writing as many falsehoods about me as
he can and hoping that some of them will stick in the memories of the gullible.

I am not writing, and have not written, falsehoods against you... So that's you lying.
I don't hope that 'some of my lies will stick in the minds of the gullible'... So that's you arrogantly
assuming you know what I think... And it's you insulting me, while being condescending and
morally superior about it...

That is in fact you doing in one sentence pretty much everything I say you do that annoys me,
and I accuse you of doing...

Pot kettle black... hypocrite.

Joined: 16 Jan 07
Moves: 95105

11 Apr 15

The post that was quoted here has been removed

do you think i take the sexuality of people into consideration when regards to 'ganging up'?

your responses seem very childish.

Joined: 31 May 06
Moves: 1795

11 Apr 15

Originally posted by stellspalfie
i beg to differ, i have both supported you arguments in the past (especially in the debates forum) and disagreed.

i would go as far as saying that i generally agree with the points you are make (but not always)..but usually disagree with the tone of your posts.

if you have a different impression...then i would like to categorically state here tha ...[text shortened]... ith the points duchess64 makes...although dislike the way she/he goes about making those points.

Ironically, I could say much the same.

I don't tend to respond to the points she makes I agree with.

Entertainingly she has no clue how many times I have thumbed up posts of hers I liked.

Perhaps this site should have a feature that lets you know WHO has thumbed up or down
your posts, as other sites I know have.

The Near Genius

Fort Gordon

Joined: 24 Jan 11
Moves: 13644

11 Apr 15

If it could be proven to my satisfaction that Jesus did not exist, then I believe I would give up Christianity as a valid religion. However, since the theory of evolution would not make me a fulfilled atheist, like Richard Dawkins, I would probably still believe in a creator God. 😏

Joined: 16 Jan 07
Moves: 95105

11 Apr 15

Originally posted by RJHinds
If it could be proven to my satisfaction that Jesus did not exist, then I believe I would give up Christianity as a valid religion. However, since the theory of evolution would not make me a fulfilled atheist, like Richard Dawkins, I would probably still believe in a creator God. 😏

the question stated that 'god' had been proven not to exist. what would you do/believe in then?

The Near Genius

Fort Gordon

Joined: 24 Jan 11
Moves: 13644

11 Apr 15

Originally posted by stellspalfie
do you think i take the sexuality of people into consideration when regards to 'ganging up'?

your responses seem very childish.

Perhaps Duchess64 is attempting to out do googlefudge, myself, and others as the most obnoxious poster on RHP. I suspect it will be a difficult task. 😏

Joined: 31 May 06
Moves: 1795

11 Apr 15

Originally posted by RJHinds
If it could be proven to my satisfaction that Jesus did not exist, then I believe I would give up Christianity as a valid religion. However, since the theory of evolution would not make me a fulfilled atheist, like Richard Dawkins, I would probably still believe in a creator God. 😏

Interesting...

I will take you at your word and applaud that you are prepared to change
your mind if it were proven JC didn't exist.

I am puzzled though that you think you would still believe in a creator god
because you find evolution unfulfilling...

If what you care about is whether it's true that a creator god exists or not...
Why does it matter if the 'true' answer is fulfilling or not?

And in what way is evolution 'unfulfilling'?

The Near Genius

Fort Gordon

Joined: 24 Jan 11
Moves: 13644

11 Apr 15

1 edit

Originally posted by googlefudge
Interesting...

I will take you at your word and applaud that you are prepared to change
your mind if it were proven JC didn't exist.

I am puzzled though that you think you would still believe in a creator god
because you find evolution unfulfilling...

If what you care about is whether it's true that a creator god exists or not...
Why does i ...[text shortened]... atter if the 'true' answer is fulfilling or not?

And in what way is evolution 'unfulfilling'?

I suppose I have been too indoctrinated to believe a super intelligent creator, like God, is necessary to explain the origin of the world in which we live. The idea of a Big Bang, the theory of evolution, and all that goes with it just seems too stupid to believe. 😏

Joined: 16 Jan 07
Moves: 95105

11 Apr 15

Originally posted by RJHinds
I suppose I have been too indoctrinated to believe a super intelligent creator, like God, is necessary to explain the origin of the world in which we live. The idea of a Big Bang, the theory of evolution, and all that goes with it just seems too stupid to believe. 😏

but an entity who requires no explanation........is required to explain our world?

Joined: 31 May 06
Moves: 1795

11 Apr 15

Originally posted by RJHinds
I suppose I have been too indoctrinated to believe a super intelligent creator, like God, is necessary to explain the origin of the world in which we live. The idea of a Big Bang, the theory of evolution, and all that goes with it just seems too stupid to believe. 😏

Well obviously I disagree...

But what's wrong with the answer "I don't know" to questions where you don't know the
answer?

Not being able to explain how we came to exist, or how the universe came to be, doesn't
mean you declare the answer to be god, and then stop looking for answers.

It means the answer is "I don't know, but I'm still looking".

That difference is why science has found out so much more than religion has.

We know everything we know today, and have all our technology, because of people who
when asked these questions didn't say "I don't know, therefore god" but instead said "I don't
know, but I'm trying to find out"***.

Now in this instance I know that you have never ever properly understood evolution or big bang
theory and thus don't even know what it is you are rejecting.
But that doesn't matter to the central point, that if you don't know something, it means
you don't know something. It doesn't mean that the answer is assumed to be 'god did it'.
Even IF the answer actually was 'god did it', THAT needs to be proven, and not assumed.

***That, plus some rigorous methodology and training, is basically what it means to be a scientist.

The Near Genius

Fort Gordon

Joined: 24 Jan 11
Moves: 13644

11 Apr 15

-1

Originally posted by stellspalfie
but an entity who requires no explanation........is required to explain our world?

Yes, in some ways. However, we have the ability to find out if we don't misinterpret what we see. That is why we need revelation.

The Universe - Created Out Of Nothing?