Religion

ExciteBike66

(2,700 posts)

21. You didn't answer my question.

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 03:07 PM

Apr 2017

Do you recognize any evidence?

"Does an ant recognize a bridge as a constructed object?"

Give an ant our intellect and he would. We are not ants.

Your argument that humans are too limited to understand your god cut both ways. The Bible was written by humans, as was the Koran and every other text upon which a religion is based. If humans are too limited, why trust your priest's statements that god exists at all?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

144 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Some Atheists Choose to Be Kind to Others [View all] rug Apr 2017 OP

Some atheists are unkind towards believers ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #1

How does nonbelief, per se, make a person more rational and reasonable? rug Apr 2017 #2

Let us compare: ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #3

Your premise is flawed. rug Apr 2017 #4

My conclusion does not rest on any type of "evidence" at all! ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #6

Wrong. Evidence is not unnecessary, it is impossible. rug Apr 2017 #8

If evidence is impossible ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #12

Do you think finite things can describe infinite things? rug Apr 2017 #25

But if god has material aspects ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #35

If god created material things, say, the universe, that would not mare god material. rug Apr 2017 #43

You do not answer my point about infiniteness ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #47

No one has said God includes material things but you. rug Apr 2017 #48

Once again, what about that gods supposed infinite nature? ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #50

You do realize that infinite means without limit, don't you? rug Apr 2017 #70

How about we reverse it, ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #78

How about you answer the question. rug Apr 2017 #80

My answer is simple ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #83

That doesn't answer the question at all. rug Apr 2017 #84

So you believe god has material aspects ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #85

You should read about the hypostatic union before using exclamation points. rug Apr 2017 #86

Here we go, ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #87

There you went. rug Apr 2017 #88

I forgot to add ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #89

Your answer was trite and unoriginal. rug Apr 2017 #90

You cited Catholic dogma! ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #91

If you don't understand the difference between religious dogma and internet atheist memes, rug Apr 2017 #92

I laughed at that, thanks! ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #93

The short answer is the amount of thought that goes into antitheist internet themes and cartoons is rug Apr 2017 #104

"you are deliberating ignoring the sheer intellectual thought that's gone into it," ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #105

David Koresh was a psychopath. rug Apr 2017 #106

And your evidence is.... ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #107

18 dead children and 58 dead adults. rug Apr 2017 #108

Riiiiiiight ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #109

Right. rug Apr 2017 #110

Whatever Koresh was ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #111

You bagan this charade with "David Koresh is the second coming". rug Apr 2017 #112

Cult, noun ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #113

This should help you, but I doubt it. rug Apr 2017 #116

Again, the Catholic Church has killed way more people ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #117

You're really dumping your grabbag of antitheist memes aren't you. rug Apr 2017 #118

You are the one who brought up body counts, rug. nt ExciteBike66 May 2017 #144

And to you Eko Apr 2017 #139

Do you define your god as infinite? Lordquinton Apr 2017 #58

It has been described that way for millennia. rug Apr 2017 #63

You apparently know the answer Lordquinton Apr 2017 #67

If anything at all was "on me" to prove, it wouldn't be to you. rug Apr 2017 #68

I've looked, Lordquinton Apr 2017 #69

Good. Now look for the topic of this subthread: "Do you define your god as infinite?" rug Apr 2017 #72

So you're refusing to answer this question? Lordquinton Apr 2017 #73

You should know, from your long list of stupid, baiting questions, followed by desperate diversions, rug Apr 2017 #74

Again, no answer Lordquinton Apr 2017 #75

None warrented. rug Apr 2017 #76

More likely that an answer doesn't exist Lordquinton Apr 2017 #100

So, because something is described in a certain way for a long time, it must be true? Doodley Apr 2017 #129

Not necessarily but it is known by anyone with a modicum of sense and education. rug Apr 2017 #133

Show me something infinite? Eko Apr 2017 #102

Prove your eye can grasp the infinite. rug Apr 2017 #103

I'm going to be nice Eko Apr 2017 #119

That is always prudent. rug Apr 2017 #120

Non belief makes a person more rational and reasonable Eko Apr 2017 #122

If that were true, you would not be using "we". rug Apr 2017 #123

Talk about unproven boasts!!! Eko Apr 2017 #124

I shouldn't tell you Eko Apr 2017 #125

Clean up your interior monologues from the flolor before you go. rug Apr 2017 #126

I have looked up this thing you call flolor Eko Apr 2017 #127

Typo cop on top of everything else. rug Apr 2017 #128

Can what? Eko Apr 2017 #130

Prove God by math. rug Apr 2017 #132

I didnt make that claim at all. Eko Apr 2017 #134

Here's how it works: rug Apr 2017 #136

Proving infinity Eko Apr 2017 #137

It's not central at all. rug Apr 2017 #138

You used it Eko Apr 2017 #140

Yo used it, inaptly, as amathematical concept that cold be proven rug Apr 2017 #141

No, Eko Apr 2017 #142

If you look back at post 25 Eko Apr 2017 #143

I never said you could Eko Apr 2017 #135

I wasnt planning to go anywhere Eko Apr 2017 #131

Immaterial concept claims to have manufacturered all material, time, and space. AtheistCrusader Apr 2017 #7

If you accept the premise that an immaterial entity created the universe, the universe is evidence. rug Apr 2017 #9

Disagree. AtheistCrusader Apr 2017 #11

That's a very big if. rug Apr 2017 #26

Well, you can define your 'if' any way you like, it's yours. AtheistCrusader Apr 2017 #54

Everything known to science had a beginning. rug Apr 2017 #64

I never said it doesn't have a beginning. AtheistCrusader Apr 2017 #65

Precisely. Which is why it's a worthy inquiry. rug Apr 2017 #66

But that is not rational by your own definition ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #13

Incorrect. rug Apr 2017 #27

I just love how the belief that god exists is somehow ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #36

I just love how you fail to grasp what I say. rug Apr 2017 #42

OK ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #46

See #48. rug Apr 2017 #49

To quote you ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #51

"No one has said God includes material things but you." rug Apr 2017 #52

You are now arguing dishonestly, which is irrational according to ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #53

The only dishonesty in this thread is your deliberate misquoting. rug Apr 2017 #71

Please ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #77

You cut the quote and pasted an incomplete quote. rug Apr 2017 #81

Quotes ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #82

Well that's circular. Volstagg Apr 2017 #29

Except that is not the statement. rug Apr 2017 #30

Divine fingerprints perhaps? guillaumeb Apr 2017 #16

I'm sure an omnipotent god could think of something... nt ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #18

But that does not require the Creator to provide a signature, or DNA. guillaumeb Apr 2017 #20

And my view is that ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #22

When science explains everything from the very beginning, meaning prior to the big bang, guillaumeb Apr 2017 #33

You don't notice the trend, eh? ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #37

Might want to start reading Stephen Hawking now then, particularly his latest book. AtheistCrusader Apr 2017 #56

Assumes it was 'created' in using the word 'creation'. AtheistCrusader Apr 2017 #24

or toolmarks, etc. AtheistCrusader Apr 2017 #23

I would argue that the Creator is not asking for your allegiance. guillaumeb Apr 2017 #32

You are free to provide it. ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #40

If that is what you believe. guillaumeb Apr 2017 #59

The concept of "god as bringer of morality" withers a bit ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #61

The concept of hell has "evolved" from the Middle Ages. guillaumeb Apr 2017 #62

Which alleged 'creator'? AtheistCrusader Apr 2017 #55

Regarding #2: guillaumeb Apr 2017 #15

Humans are too stupid, is that it? ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #17

Stupid is your choice of words. I prefer fallible. guillaumeb Apr 2017 #19

You didn't answer my question. ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #21

Humans will comprehend all, is that it? rug Apr 2017 #28

We are working on it, ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #38

It's a matter of mental capacity not priesthood. rug Apr 2017 #41

My point stands ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #44

Hope and faith, even stubborn faith, are considered virtues. rug Apr 2017 #45

In many faiths, it is believed that the writings are divinely inspired. guillaumeb Apr 2017 #31

We are even less capable of understanding... Bretton Garcia Apr 2017 #34

If you are determined to characterize faith as unthinking obedience, guillaumeb Apr 2017 #60

They were and are scientists ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #79

Can their faith be separated from the rest of their personality? guillaumeb Apr 2017 #94

It doesn't have to be separated. ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #95

You seem to be inferring something that was not stated. guillaumeb Apr 2017 #96

A believer might claim.... ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #97

But if the experiment proves that the theory is correct, guillaumeb Apr 2017 #98

It's not religion doing the inspiring... ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #99

We did not create ants ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #39

Why does everyone keep assuming all these ridiculous limitations on ants? AtheistCrusader Apr 2017 #57

They insist on getting into food. guillaumeb Apr 2017 #101

Guil? Bishop Barron said Religion is not so faith-based Bretton Garcia Apr 2017 #114

An interesting question for a separate post. guillaumeb Apr 2017 #121

wat. AtheistCrusader Apr 2017 #115

Nonbelief at least eliminates one cause of problems Bretton Garcia Apr 2017 #10

Humanism Freethinker65 Apr 2017 #5

Being an atheist does not obligate one to treat religious believers poorly. Amen. Jim__ Apr 2017 #14