Frank Lopez
Atheists always asked theists to prove that there is a God which theists are always doing. Why don’t atheists prove that there is no God and lay their arguments instead?
John the Atheist: That's because atheism is a negative position @ Frank. It is always the one who with the positive claim who has the burden of proof. An atheist never say that god doesn't exist, fortunately it always begin with not believing the theist's claim.
Let see...If I say that there is a secret covert ops named G.I.Joe in the US military, I have the burden of proof to prove that this "G.I. Joe exist. If you don't believe me, well you are not obligated to give me proofs why you don't believe me. If I failed miserably to prove my positive claim then my doubt becomes a positive position.
Jun Paras: So you are after logical and rational facts that can be presented for you to believe? Do you ask yourselves that you have also logical and rational facts that you can present to us in order for us to believe that God doesn’t exists? Just like I said, atheist only ended up asking questions and doubts but if you will undergone cross examination regarding your principle, then I think you cannot stand firm on your belief. We have laid down our side that through logical thinking, God does exists. Because God, is being characterized in the Bible as THE CREATOR. If you don’t believe that everything in this ever-glorious universe was created, or being planned by a very powerful Creator, because you have intentionally blind-folded your hearts, then what is your explanation? Can you give us your side for us to compare whom is handling the true logical and rational facts?
John the Atheist: As I have already said to Mr. Frank Lopez, an atheist (since its a negative position) is not obligated to give any claim. It is the one who claim the positive who has the burden to give proof. Remember that positive atheism is a result of negative atheism. If believers cannot give any proof of the existence of a god, then positive atheism is justify. Now since you guys are the one who is making the claim (God exist), it is up to you to support it.
Sorry guys, I didn't made the rules.
Now claiming from a holy book is really not much of an evidence. Remember that an appeal to authority is really a fallacy. If you keep your bet in a book...well remember that you are talking to a non-believer, so the Bible as an evidence doesn't apply here.
To claim propositional knowledge from the Bible is ah...well useless when talking to an atheist - because before you can claim knowledge from the Bible you have to prove it first that the Bible is infallible in principle and can hence be exempted from criticism. So Bible verses and Bible claims are a no-no when it comes to logical discussions.
Jun Paras: CLAIMING IS ONE THING, BUT PROVING IS ANOTHER THING. I observed in your comments, mostly of you atheist, is that you are playing safe, don’t just comments and look for loop holes for what we believe in, you must lay-down your belief, YOU MUST STAND FIRM THAT GOD DOESN’T EXISTS, WE ARE LOOKING FOR YOUR SIDE, YOUR LINE OF REASONING, if you don’t mind. Then we must compare each other side, who has a logical reasoning. I’m waiting for your answer.
John the Atheist: Nah...It's not playing safe. We just play by the rules...rules of rational discourses. Now let see...Loop holes are everywhere when it comes to religious discourses...As I have already stated, "Religion and religious faith is illogical".
I have already told you that believers are the one who are obligated to lay their reasons for believing. When dealing with an atheist, you must first lay your reasons why believing in a god is a rational position. If you have done that then I will try deconstructing your thesis. That's where we start comparing. So are you willing to lay down your cards?
Jun Paras: By the way, I just want to clear some things, I don’t agree that culture is a part of faith that I’m trying to imply. I’m talking about a scientific and logical faith. Most faith in this world are nonsense. And these faith cannot be used as evidence, sometimes it is against the law of man especially in the law of God.
John the Atheist: Faith is not a part of culture...I was talking about conscience.
Jun Paras: I’m just wondering, you are looking for some logical reasons, but you doesn’t include faith and conscience as an evidence. Do you know what is the meaning of logical reasoning? The best logical reasoning lies primarily on one’s conscience. For example, is it logical to steal for you to be rich? or to rape a girl? or to kill? Of course its very illogical, a man who’ll say that these are logical is out of his stupid mind. But how do we know that it is illogical? Do we need to research for some law books or engineering books for it to say that it is so? Or we simply ask our conscience? If you study our law, it is based primarily on good conscience, we are prohibited to kill, to steal, to rape… etc.
John the Atheist: Let me illustrate my point regarding faith and conscience as evidence - According to the definition conscience it is the awareness of a moral or ethical aspect to one's conduct together with the urge to prefer right over wrong. Now let's talk about those Islamic terrorists that rammed their plane in September 11. Do you think that those who killed all those people believe that what they did was wrong? Now suppose you believe that they did it for the name of their god, do you think that they will feel bothered by their conscience?
As Thomas Aquinas have already said, conscience is affected by someones doctrine or belief. Another good example to this is the treatment of Jews in World War 2. Civilian populace in Nazi Germany were apathetic in the plight of the Jews because they were led to believe that what happening to the Jews is just a punishment on their crime against Jesus Christ.
In most holy books for example, we can see commandments that prohibit stealing, right? But if you will also notice, in the same books, their god orders his people to plunder their enemies. That's conscience for you.
Jun Paras: An animal, even though not having a mind the same as we are, but if you observe them, they’re doing some logical things beside the fact that they are not being instructed step by step, they know how to do good. Its their nature to take good care of their siblings. So what’s my point? Dont exclude conscience if you want to study reality.
John the Atheist: Instinct is difference from conscience. But conscience is a product of instinct. For atheists, ethics is a result of sociological-biological evolution. Instinct pave the way for the development of ethics. So VIOLA! Culture and ethics = Conscience.
From a certain dominik
To all atheists….
I raise this question:
The blood circulating in your body without the aid of any machine, at a precise time and speed for you to exist….
The way the Earth was distant and revolve around the sun at exact measurement and time…
And so on and so forth for things that cannot be explained by men…
Don’t you ALL think that there is WISDOM behind all these things???
John the Atheist: To dominik
Begging the question. Now before you ask a so-called WISDOM behind all these things, first let us ask...Is there a proof that the mind is independent to a material brain? Remember that wisdom is a faculty of the mind and the mind is connected to the activity of the brain. If you can give me a sample of an independent mind that can operate without a material brain then I can ponder on your question @ dominik.
Atheists always asked theists to prove that there is a God which theists are always doing. Why don’t atheists prove that there is no God and lay their arguments instead?
John the Atheist: That's because atheism is a negative position @ Frank. It is always the one who with the positive claim who has the burden of proof. An atheist never say that god doesn't exist, fortunately it always begin with not believing the theist's claim.
Let see...If I say that there is a secret covert ops named G.I.Joe in the US military, I have the burden of proof to prove that this "G.I. Joe exist. If you don't believe me, well you are not obligated to give me proofs why you don't believe me. If I failed miserably to prove my positive claim then my doubt becomes a positive position.
Jun Paras: So you are after logical and rational facts that can be presented for you to believe? Do you ask yourselves that you have also logical and rational facts that you can present to us in order for us to believe that God doesn’t exists? Just like I said, atheist only ended up asking questions and doubts but if you will undergone cross examination regarding your principle, then I think you cannot stand firm on your belief. We have laid down our side that through logical thinking, God does exists. Because God, is being characterized in the Bible as THE CREATOR. If you don’t believe that everything in this ever-glorious universe was created, or being planned by a very powerful Creator, because you have intentionally blind-folded your hearts, then what is your explanation? Can you give us your side for us to compare whom is handling the true logical and rational facts?
John the Atheist: As I have already said to Mr. Frank Lopez, an atheist (since its a negative position) is not obligated to give any claim. It is the one who claim the positive who has the burden to give proof. Remember that positive atheism is a result of negative atheism. If believers cannot give any proof of the existence of a god, then positive atheism is justify. Now since you guys are the one who is making the claim (God exist), it is up to you to support it.
Sorry guys, I didn't made the rules.
Now claiming from a holy book is really not much of an evidence. Remember that an appeal to authority is really a fallacy. If you keep your bet in a book...well remember that you are talking to a non-believer, so the Bible as an evidence doesn't apply here.
To claim propositional knowledge from the Bible is ah...well useless when talking to an atheist - because before you can claim knowledge from the Bible you have to prove it first that the Bible is infallible in principle and can hence be exempted from criticism. So Bible verses and Bible claims are a no-no when it comes to logical discussions.
Jun Paras: CLAIMING IS ONE THING, BUT PROVING IS ANOTHER THING. I observed in your comments, mostly of you atheist, is that you are playing safe, don’t just comments and look for loop holes for what we believe in, you must lay-down your belief, YOU MUST STAND FIRM THAT GOD DOESN’T EXISTS, WE ARE LOOKING FOR YOUR SIDE, YOUR LINE OF REASONING, if you don’t mind. Then we must compare each other side, who has a logical reasoning. I’m waiting for your answer.
John the Atheist: Nah...It's not playing safe. We just play by the rules...rules of rational discourses. Now let see...Loop holes are everywhere when it comes to religious discourses...As I have already stated, "Religion and religious faith is illogical".
I have already told you that believers are the one who are obligated to lay their reasons for believing. When dealing with an atheist, you must first lay your reasons why believing in a god is a rational position. If you have done that then I will try deconstructing your thesis. That's where we start comparing. So are you willing to lay down your cards?
Jun Paras: By the way, I just want to clear some things, I don’t agree that culture is a part of faith that I’m trying to imply. I’m talking about a scientific and logical faith. Most faith in this world are nonsense. And these faith cannot be used as evidence, sometimes it is against the law of man especially in the law of God.
John the Atheist: Faith is not a part of culture...I was talking about conscience.
Jun Paras: I’m just wondering, you are looking for some logical reasons, but you doesn’t include faith and conscience as an evidence. Do you know what is the meaning of logical reasoning? The best logical reasoning lies primarily on one’s conscience. For example, is it logical to steal for you to be rich? or to rape a girl? or to kill? Of course its very illogical, a man who’ll say that these are logical is out of his stupid mind. But how do we know that it is illogical? Do we need to research for some law books or engineering books for it to say that it is so? Or we simply ask our conscience? If you study our law, it is based primarily on good conscience, we are prohibited to kill, to steal, to rape… etc.
John the Atheist: Let me illustrate my point regarding faith and conscience as evidence - According to the definition conscience it is the awareness of a moral or ethical aspect to one's conduct together with the urge to prefer right over wrong. Now let's talk about those Islamic terrorists that rammed their plane in September 11. Do you think that those who killed all those people believe that what they did was wrong? Now suppose you believe that they did it for the name of their god, do you think that they will feel bothered by their conscience?
As Thomas Aquinas have already said, conscience is affected by someones doctrine or belief. Another good example to this is the treatment of Jews in World War 2. Civilian populace in Nazi Germany were apathetic in the plight of the Jews because they were led to believe that what happening to the Jews is just a punishment on their crime against Jesus Christ.
In most holy books for example, we can see commandments that prohibit stealing, right? But if you will also notice, in the same books, their god orders his people to plunder their enemies. That's conscience for you.
Jun Paras: An animal, even though not having a mind the same as we are, but if you observe them, they’re doing some logical things beside the fact that they are not being instructed step by step, they know how to do good. Its their nature to take good care of their siblings. So what’s my point? Dont exclude conscience if you want to study reality.
John the Atheist: Instinct is difference from conscience. But conscience is a product of instinct. For atheists, ethics is a result of sociological-biological evolution. Instinct pave the way for the development of ethics. So VIOLA! Culture and ethics = Conscience.
From a certain dominik
To all atheists….
I raise this question:
The blood circulating in your body without the aid of any machine, at a precise time and speed for you to exist….
The way the Earth was distant and revolve around the sun at exact measurement and time…
And so on and so forth for things that cannot be explained by men…
Don’t you ALL think that there is WISDOM behind all these things???
John the Atheist: To dominik
Begging the question. Now before you ask a so-called WISDOM behind all these things, first let us ask...Is there a proof that the mind is independent to a material brain? Remember that wisdom is a faculty of the mind and the mind is connected to the activity of the brain. If you can give me a sample of an independent mind that can operate without a material brain then I can ponder on your question @ dominik.
Until next time,
John the Atheist
1 comments:
haha.. nice1.. :D
Post a Comment