| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Greg Flynn" |
| Date: |
12 Nov 2005 10:23:16 PM |
| Object: |
Athiesm is Impossible |
Athiesm posits that the universe wasn't created, therefore, it assumes one
of two other possiblities.
1. The universe was created from nothing by nothing
2. The universe has always existed.
Since the first case is strictly contradictory then only the second case is
worthy of consideration. I say that the second case is impossible and I
believe I can show this in five steps. Rather then revealing all five steps
I will reveal them one at a time. If the first step is conceded then I will
move on to the second. I assume that the first will never be conceded,
therefore, there is no reason to reveal any of the other steps. I don't
want to reveal the other parts because I think it would allow for focus on
the current part to be lost.
Step One.
Can any material object be divided an infinite number of times? What is
your opinion? Please state reasons. Of course I will reveal my opinion but
I want to see how folks answer this question, hoping that I can jump start
this argument and by-pass what isn't truely necessary.
Greg
.
|
|
| User: "bob young" |
|
| Title: Re: Athiesm is Impossible |
12 Nov 2005 11:32:01 PM |
|
|
J Forbes wrote:
Greg Flynn wrote:
Athiesm posits that the universe wasn't created, therefore, it assumes one
of two other possiblities.
Greg, I'm just shocked that you could not grasp the simple fact that
atheism posits *nothing*.
You sound like you have some brainpower...what gives? it's pretty
simple, atheists are people who do not belive in god(s).
Think about it.
Waste of time.
Folks that think a powerful being looking just like us created everything
including the thousands of false gods is incapapble of rational thought.
Jim
.
|
|
|
| User: "J Forbes" |
|
| Title: Re: Athiesm is Impossible |
12 Nov 2005 11:36:39 PM |
|
|
bob young wrote:
J Forbes wrote:
Greg Flynn wrote:
Athiesm posits that the universe wasn't created, therefore, it assumes one
of two other possiblities.
Greg, I'm just shocked that you could not grasp the simple fact that
atheism posits *nothing*.
You sound like you have some brainpower...what gives? it's pretty
simple, atheists are people who do not belive in god(s).
Think about it.
Waste of time.
Folks that think a powerful being looking just like us created everything
including the thousands of false gods is incapapble of rational thought.
it's almost like I was being sarcastic, eh?
Jim
.
|
|
|
| User: "bob young" |
|
| Title: Re: Athiesm is Impossible |
13 Nov 2005 11:27:02 PM |
|
|
J Forbes wrote:
bob young wrote:
J Forbes wrote:
Greg Flynn wrote:
Athiesm posits that the universe wasn't created, therefore, it assumes one
of two other possiblities.
Greg, I'm just shocked that you could not grasp the simple fact that
atheism posits *nothing*.
You sound like you have some brainpower...what gives? it's pretty
simple, atheists are people who do not belive in god(s).
Think about it.
Waste of time.
Folks that think a powerful being looking just like us created everything
including the thousands of false gods is incapapble of rational thought.
it's almost like I was being sarcastic, eh?
Never mind Jim, as long as we are both sane non believers, it's OK with me!
Cheers
Jim
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "655321" |
|
| Title: Re: Athiesm is Impossible |
13 Nov 2005 03:23:50 AM |
|
|
On 2005-11-12 21:02:32 -0800, "J Forbes" <jforbspam@fastmail.fm> said:
You sound like you have some brainpower...
Your ears are deceiving you, J. This is yet another intellectual
lightweight trying to find a wet paper sack to punch his way out of.
--
GlennGlenn (655321) -- aa#825 --
"Genocide is used sparingly by God in only extreme circumstances." -Jim Spaza
.
|
|
|
| User: "Llanzlan Klazmon" |
|
| Title: Re: Athiesm is Impossible |
13 Nov 2005 04:45:15 PM |
|
|
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:2005111301234850073%DipthotDipthot@YahooYahooComCom:
On 2005-11-12 21:02:32 -0800, "J Forbes" <jforbspam@fastmail.fm> said:
You sound like you have some brainpower...
Your ears are deceiving you, J. This is yet another intellectual
lightweight trying to find a wet paper sack to punch his way out of.
Futhermore it has all been explained to him before but he either can't grasp
or deliberately ignores the answers given.
Klazmon.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Athiesm is Impossible |
13 Nov 2005 03:06:46 PM |
|
|
In <Uczdf.6031$5R4.182@trnddc06>, "Greg Flynn" <bunpokeNOSPAM@verizon.net>
wrote:
Athiesm posits...
<SNIP>
Aren't you the dishonest little *****?
--
Mark K. Bilbo
--------------------------------------------------
Feds are treating Louisiana like enemy
"...it may be that they may have written us off."
http://makeashorterlink.com/?O21E51C1C
Design flaws and malfeasance
http://makeashorterlink.com/?W35E21C1C
Outdated standards
http://makeashorterlink.com/?X14E32C1C
http://www.nola.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Don Kresch" |
|
| Title: Re: Athiesm is Impossible |
13 Nov 2005 04:35:20 PM |
|
|
In alt.atheism On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 04:23:16 GMT, "Greg Flynn"
<bunpokeNOSPAM@verizon.net> let us all know that:
Athiesm posits that the universe wasn't created, therefore, it assumes one
of two other possiblities.
1. The universe was created from nothing by nothing
2. The universe has always existed.
Since the first case is strictly contradictory then only the second case is
worthy of consideration. I say that the second case is impossible
Then you make the claim that existence preceded existence,
which is impossible.
Therefore, the universe has always existed.
Hint: all cosmological arguments have been refuted. Don't try
them.
Don
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "*nemo*" |
|
| Title: Re: Athiesm is Impossible |
13 Nov 2005 11:25:39 AM |
|
|
In article <Uczdf.6031$5R4.182@trnddc06>,
"Greg Flynn" <bunpokeNOSPAM@verizon.net> wrote:
Athiesm posits that the universe wasn't created, therefore, it assumes one
of two other possiblities.
1. The universe was created from nothing by nothing
2. The universe has always existed.
Since the first case is strictly contradictory then only the second case is
worthy of consideration.
Why attack a strawman?
Oh right... you can't bear the idea that there might be people in the
universe that don't believe in your sky-pixie. Why does that thought
drive you to post such silliness here? Are you that insecure about your
religion?
--
Nemo - EAC Commissioner for Bible Belt Underwater Operations.
Atheist #1331 (the Palindrome of doom!)
BAAWA Knight! - One of those warm Southern Knights, y'all!
Charter member, SMASH!!
http://home.earthlink.net/~jehdjh/Relpg.html
Draco Dormiens Nunquam Titillandus
Quotemeister since March 2002
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Athiesm is Impossible |
13 Nov 2005 02:11:26 AM |
|
|
In article <Uczdf.6031$5R4.182@trnddc06>,
"Greg Flynn" <bunpokeNOSPAM@verizon.net> wrote:
Athiesm posits that the universe wasn't created, therefore, it assumes one
of two other possiblities.
That's a lot of assuming, on your part.
1. The universe was created from nothing by nothing
No.
2. The universe has always existed.
No.
Since the first case is strictly contradictory then only the second case is
worthy of consideration. I say that the second case is impossible and I
believe I can show this in five steps. Rather then revealing all five steps
I will reveal them one at a time. If the first step is conceded then I will
move on to the second. I assume that the first will never be conceded,
therefore, there is no reason to reveal any of the other steps. I don't
want to reveal the other parts because I think it would allow for focus on
the current part to be lost.
Are we supposed to care?
Step One.
Can any material object be divided an infinite number of times? What is
your opinion? Please state reasons. Of course I will reveal my opinion but
I want to see how folks answer this question, hoping that I can jump start
this argument and by-pass what isn't truely necessary.
And this has something to do with the origin of the universe because...?
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities"
-Voltaire
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gregory Gadow" |
|
| Title: YOU are impossible (Was: Athiesm is Impossible) |
14 Nov 2005 08:23:10 AM |
|
|
It is known that there are an infinite number of worlds, simply because there is
an infinite amount of space for them. However, not every one of them is
inhabited. Therefore, there must be a finite number of inhabited worlds. Any
finite number divided by infinity is as near to nothing as makes no odds, so the
average population of all the planets in the Universe can be said to be zero.
From this it follows that the population of the whole Universe is also zero, and
that any people you may meet from time to time are merely the products of a
deranged imagination. -- the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
--
Gregory Gadow
techbear@serv.net
http://www.serv.net/~techbear
"[W]e have never held that moral disapproval, without any other asserted
state interest, is a sufficient rationale under the Equal Protection
Clause to justify a law that discriminates among groups of persons."
- Sandra Day O`Conner, _Lawrence v Texas_
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=000&invol=02-102
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: YOU are impossible (Was: Athiesm is Impossible) |
14 Nov 2005 11:34:07 AM |
|
|
"Gregory Gadow" <techbear@serv.net> wrote in message
news:43789DCE.2936E595@serv.net...
It is known that there are an infinite number of worlds, simply because
there is
an infinite amount of space for them. However, not every one of them is
inhabited. Therefore, there must be a finite number of inhabited worlds.
Any
finite number divided by infinity is as near to nothing as makes no odds,
so the
average population of all the planets in the Universe can be said to be
zero.
From this it follows that the population of the whole Universe is also
zero, and
that any people you may meet from time to time are merely the products of
a
deranged imagination. -- the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
Ummm..............what? ;)
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
#1557
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gregory Gadow" |
|
| Title: Re: YOU are impossible (Was: Athiesm is Impossible) |
14 Nov 2005 04:47:13 PM |
|
|
Robibnikoff wrote:
"Gregory Gadow" <techbear@serv.net> wrote in message
news:43789DCE.2936E595@serv.net...
It is known that there are an infinite number of worlds, simply because
there is
an infinite amount of space for them. However, not every one of them is
inhabited. Therefore, there must be a finite number of inhabited worlds.
Any
finite number divided by infinity is as near to nothing as makes no odds,
so the
average population of all the planets in the Universe can be said to be
zero.
From this it follows that the population of the whole Universe is also
zero, and
that any people you may meet from time to time are merely the products of a
deranged imagination. -- the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
Ummm..............what? ;)
Mr. Flynn uses twisted "logic" to "prove" that atheism is impossible. I figured
I would do the same to prove that he is impossible, and what do you know,
Douglas Adams had beaten me to it ;-b
--
Gregory Gadow
techbear@serv.net
http://www.serv.net/~techbear
"[W]e have never held that moral disapproval, without any other asserted
state interest, is a sufficient rationale under the Equal Protection
Clause to justify a law that discriminates among groups of persons."
- Sandra Day O`Conner, _Lawrence v Texas_
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=000&invol=02-102
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: YOU are impossible (Was: Athiesm is Impossible) |
14 Nov 2005 09:38:35 AM |
|
|
Gregory Gadow <techbear@serv.net> wrote in alt.atheism
It is known that there are an infinite number of worlds, simply because there is
an infinite amount of space for them. However, not every one of them is
inhabited. Therefore, there must be a finite number of inhabited worlds. Any
finite number divided by infinity is as near to nothing as makes no odds, so the
average population of all the planets in the Universe can be said to be zero.
From this it follows that the population of the whole Universe is also zero, and
that any people you may meet from time to time are merely the products of a
deranged imagination. -- the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
Sounds like something Eric Brze would write. :)
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Korbin Dallas" |
|
| Title: Re: Athiesm is Impossible |
13 Nov 2005 09:07:07 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 04:23:16 +0000, Greg Flynn wrote:
Athiesm posits that the universe wasn't created, therefore, it assumes one
of two other possiblities.
Atheism is the lack of Theism.
It says nothing as to the origin of the universe.
I leave the origin of the universe to scientist who theorize how it all
got started.
--
Korbin Dallas
The name was changed to protect the guilty.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Athiesm is Impossible |
13 Nov 2005 10:37:04 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 04:23:16 GMT, "Greg Flynn"
<bunpokeNOSPAM@verizon.net> drooled his idiocy in alt.atheism:
Athiesm posits that the universe wasn't created,
That's nice Greg. Come back when you find a clue.
[]
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president
represents, more and more closely, the inner soul
of the people. On some great and glorious day the
plain folks of the land will reach their heart's
desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." --- H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: Athiesm is Impossible |
13 Nov 2005 11:29:19 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 08:37:04 -0800, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 04:23:16 GMT, "Greg Flynn"
<bunpokeNOSPAM@verizon.net> drooled his idiocy in alt.atheism:
Athiesm posits that the universe wasn't created,
That's nice Greg. Come back when you find a clue.
[]
Greg is invincibly ignorant.
Thomas P.
"Life must be lived forwards but understood backwards"
(Kierkegaard)
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Athiesm is Impossible |
14 Nov 2005 10:31:52 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 18:29:19 +0100, thomas p
<tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 08:37:04 -0800, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 04:23:16 GMT, "Greg Flynn"
<bunpokeNOSPAM@verizon.net> drooled his idiocy in alt.atheism:
Athiesm posits that the universe wasn't created,
That's nice Greg. Come back when you find a clue.
[]
Greg is invincibly ignorant.
And he's proud of it.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president
represents, more and more closely, the inner soul
of the people. On some great and glorious day the
plain folks of the land will reach their heart's
desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." --- H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: Athiesm is Impossible |
14 Nov 2005 12:29:13 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 14 Nov 2005 08:31:52 -0800, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 18:29:19 +0100, thomas p
<tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 08:37:04 -0800, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 04:23:16 GMT, "Greg Flynn"
<bunpokeNOSPAM@verizon.net> drooled his idiocy in alt.atheism:
Athiesm posits that the universe wasn't created,
That's nice Greg. Come back when you find a clue.
[]
Greg is invincibly ignorant.
And he's proud of it.
Apparently so.
Thomas P.
"Life must be lived forwards but understood backwards"
(Kierkegaard)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Liz" |
|
| Title: Re: Athiesm is Impossible |
14 Nov 2005 06:15:30 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 04:23:16 GMT, "Greg Flynn"
<bunpokeNOSPAM@verizon.net> in news message
<Uczdf.6031$5R4.182@trnddc06> wrote:
Athiesm posits that the universe wasn't created, therefore, it assumes one
of two other possiblities.
1. The universe was created from nothing by nothing
2. The universe has always existed.
Since the first case is strictly contradictory then only the second case is
worthy of consideration.
(I'd like to see your case for #1 if it read "the universe was created
from nothing by something", but that is merely a parenthetical and not
mundane to this thread. Just musing.)
I say that the second case is impossible and I
believe I can show this in five steps. Rather then revealing all five steps
I will reveal them one at a time. If the first step is conceded then I will
move on to the second. I assume that the first will never be conceded,
therefore, there is no reason to reveal any of the other steps. I don't
want to reveal the other parts because I think it would allow for focus on
the current part to be lost.
No, you don't want to reveal the other parts because you are trying to
get your respondents to agree with your arguments before you present
them. This is immature and cowardly. Most of us here are adults and
can multi task. We do not need your argument spoon fed to us in
"steps".
Step One.
Can any material object be divided an infinite number of times? What is
your opinion? Please state reasons. Of course I will reveal my opinion but
I want to see how folks answer this question, hoping that I can jump start
this argument and by-pass what isn't truely necessary.
Be a man. Go ahead and tell us your opinion and how that relates to
your argument that the universe has always existed.
My opinion is that the above "Step One" doesn't even address whether
the universe has always existed or not because the universe itself has
not been divided an infinite number of times. It has, in fact,
expanded. So, tell us your rationale and why you think this "Step
One" has any bearing on your central argument.
And while you are at it, present steps 2-5 so that we can know your
argument in its entirety.
People who need to follow instruction don't understand the problem.
Liz #658 BAAWA
One of the principal differences between science and religion
is that science acknowledges that it is the creation of humankind
and, thus, welcomes correction. Religion does not and cannot. --
George Ricker
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: Athiesm is Impossible |
13 Nov 2005 03:22:55 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 04:23:16 GMT, "Greg Flynn"
<bunpokeNOSPAM@verizon.net> wrote:
<snip>
You didn't get spanked enough the first time you posted this drivel?
We are living proof that atheism is not impossible. You are living
proof that educating a fundy *is* impossible.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Athiesm is Impossible |
13 Nov 2005 06:04:22 PM |
|
|
In <lkbfn1llfmov3s17e8mkm1ciud42ed1oh6@4ax.com>, John Baker
<nunya@biziniz.net> wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 04:23:16 GMT, "Greg Flynn" <bunpokeNOSPAM@verizon.net>
wrote:
<snip>
You didn't get spanked enough the first time you posted this drivel?
Is he bright enough to understand what happened the first time he posted?
--
Mark K. Bilbo
--------------------------------------------------
Forgotten Already
http://makeashorterlink.com/?H1233272C
Feds are treating Louisiana like enemy
"...it may be that they may have written us off."
http://makeashorterlink.com/?O21E51C1C
http://www.nola.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: Athiesm is Impossible |
13 Nov 2005 06:29:25 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 18:04:22 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:
In <lkbfn1llfmov3s17e8mkm1ciud42ed1oh6@4ax.com>, John Baker
<nunya@biziniz.net> wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 04:23:16 GMT, "Greg Flynn" <bunpokeNOSPAM@verizon.net>
wrote:
<snip>
You didn't get spanked enough the first time you posted this drivel?
Is he bright enough to understand what happened the first time he posted?
I'd say probably not.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Les Hellawell" |
|
| Title: Re: Athiesm is Impossible |
14 Nov 2005 06:34:24 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 14 Nov 2005 00:29:25 GMT, John Baker <nunya@biziniz.net>
wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 18:04:22 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:
In <lkbfn1llfmov3s17e8mkm1ciud42ed1oh6@4ax.com>, John Baker
<nunya@biziniz.net> wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 04:23:16 GMT, "Greg Flynn" <bunpokeNOSPAM@verizon.net>
wrote:
<snip>
You didn't get spanked enough the first time you posted this drivel?
Is he bright enough to understand what happened the first time he posted?
I'd say probably not.
He is only bright enough to think he understands what his priests
tells him to understand. The pope tells him he is an 'evolutionist' so
now he is an evlutionist. I note he did not enter the fray on our side
against Jason's denial of what to Duke is gods wonderful evolution
mechanism but am pleased he rejects that stupid Adam and Eve
mythology with that silly original sin notion that fails reasonable
scrutiny.
Les Hellawell
Greetings from:
YORKSHIRE The White Rose County
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Athiesm is Impossible |
14 Nov 2005 10:33:24 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 18:04:22 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:
In <lkbfn1llfmov3s17e8mkm1ciud42ed1oh6@4ax.com>, John Baker
<nunya@biziniz.net> wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 04:23:16 GMT, "Greg Flynn" <bunpokeNOSPAM@verizon.net>
wrote:
<snip>
You didn't get spanked enough the first time you posted this drivel?
Is he bright enough to understand what happened the first time he posted?
No.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president
represents, more and more closely, the inner soul
of the people. On some great and glorious day the
plain folks of the land will reach their heart's
desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." --- H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Athiesm is Impossible |
12 Nov 2005 11:35:47 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 04:23:16 GMT, "Greg Flynn"
<bunpokeNOSPAM@verizon.net> wrote:
Athiesm posits that the universe wasn't created, therefore, it assumes one
of two other possiblities.
1. The universe was created from nothing by nothing
2. The universe has always existed.
So, which do you believe:
1 God was created from nothing by nothing
2. God has always existed.
Why do you think its better to have an extra step to complicate
things? I mean, the universe actually exists, so one should feel
justified in speculating as to its origins. There's no reason to
believe that a goddiddit. Sure, it makes it easier for a simple mind
to explain the universe, but unfortunately it opens a whole new can of
worms. Starting with "Who created the creator?"
I'm willing to say "I don't know , some day I might." I am not willing
to fill in the cracks with god-spackle. Sure it's harder my way, but I
*am* willing to use my brain.
--
zamboni #2139
BAAWA Assistant to the Vice-Administrator of Malevolence
EAC Tertiary Adjunct to the Dispenser of Obfuscation.
.
|
|
|
| User: "The other Donald" |
|
| Title: AQotM Nomination -Re: Athiesm is Impossible |
13 Nov 2005 12:15:49 AM |
|
|
<zamboni30000@knowshpamatyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:gridn1t2h4lnvlk1r806nm5jb81sbfc5ob@4ax.com...
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 04:23:16 GMT, "Greg Flynn"
<bunpokeNOSPAM@verizon.net> wrote:
Athiesm posits that the universe wasn't created, therefore, it assumes
one
of two other possiblities.
1. The universe was created from nothing by nothing
2. The universe has always existed.
So, which do you believe:
1 God was created from nothing by nothing
2. God has always existed.
Why do you think its better to have an extra step to complicate
things? I mean, the universe actually exists, so one should feel
justified in speculating as to its origins. There's no reason to
believe that a goddiddit. Sure, it makes it easier for a simple mind
to explain the universe, but unfortunately it opens a whole new can of
worms. Starting with "Who created the creator?"
NOMINATED PORTION:
I'm willing to say "I don't know , some day I might." I am not willing
to fill in the cracks with god-spackle. Sure it's harder my way, but I
*am* willing to use my brain.
--
zamboni #2139
Seconds, anyone? ...anyone?
--
-Donald in Austin
AA #2104
Apatriot #22
Atheist FF/EMT
.....and ordained minister
Stork pin recipient: May 1, 2003 -Madelyn
-Mr. Worf, set phasers on "***** You" and fire at will. -Doc Smartass
.
|
|
|
| User: "Adam H." |
|
| Title: Re: AQotM Nomination -Re: Athiesm is Impossible |
13 Nov 2005 12:18:45 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 06:15:49 GMT, "The other Donald"
<the_donald_13@yahoooY.com> wrote:
<zamboni30000@knowshpamatyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:gridn1t2h4lnvlk1r806nm5jb81sbfc5ob@4ax.com...
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 04:23:16 GMT, "Greg Flynn"
<bunpokeNOSPAM@verizon.net> wrote:
Athiesm posits that the universe wasn't created, therefore, it assumes
one
of two other possiblities.
1. The universe was created from nothing by nothing
2. The universe has always existed.
So, which do you believe:
1 God was created from nothing by nothing
2. God has always existed.
Why do you think its better to have an extra step to complicate
things? I mean, the universe actually exists, so one should feel
justified in speculating as to its origins. There's no reason to
believe that a goddiddit. Sure, it makes it easier for a simple mind
to explain the universe, but unfortunately it opens a whole new can of
worms. Starting with "Who created the creator?"
NOMINATED PORTION:
I'm willing to say "I don't know , some day I might." I am not willing
to fill in the cracks with god-spackle. Sure it's harder my way, but I
*am* willing to use my brain.
--
zamboni #2139
Seconds, anyone? ...anyone?
Oh, yes. Seconded (for the use of the term 'god-spackle', if nothing
else).
.
|
|
|
| User: "*nemo*" |
|
| Title: Re: AQotM Nomination -Re: Athiesm is Impossible |
15 Nov 2005 04:39:14 AM |
|
|
In article
<jkmdn19amc3mq421b0emlnfs8t9364eftc@fe06.highwinds-media.phx>,
Adam H. <adam@mailinator.com> wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 06:15:49 GMT, "The other Donald"
<the_donald_13@yahoooY.com> wrote:
<zamboni30000@knowshpamatyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:gridn1t2h4lnvlk1r806nm5jb81sbfc5ob@4ax.com...
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 04:23:16 GMT, "Greg Flynn"
<bunpokeNOSPAM@verizon.net> wrote:
Athiesm posits that the universe wasn't created, therefore, it assumes
one
of two other possiblities.
1. The universe was created from nothing by nothing
2. The universe has always existed.
So, which do you believe:
1 God was created from nothing by nothing
2. God has always existed.
Why do you think its better to have an extra step to complicate
things? I mean, the universe actually exists, so one should feel
justified in speculating as to its origins. There's no reason to
believe that a goddiddit. Sure, it makes it easier for a simple mind
to explain the universe, but unfortunately it opens a whole new can of
worms. Starting with "Who created the creator?"
NOMINATED PORTION:
I'm willing to say "I don't know , some day I might." I am not willing
to fill in the cracks with god-spackle. Sure it's harder my way, but I
*am* willing to use my brain.
--
zamboni #2139
Seconds, anyone? ...anyone?
Oh, yes. Seconded (for the use of the term 'god-spackle', if nothing
else).
Recorded.
--
Nemo - EAC Commissioner for Bible Belt Underwater Operations.
Atheist #1331 (the Palindrome of doom!)
BAAWA Knight! - One of those warm Southern Knights, y'all!
Charter member, SMASH!!
http://home.earthlink.net/~jehdjh/Relpg.html
Draco Dormiens Nunquam Titillandus
Quotemeister since March 2002
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Didi" |
|
| Title: Re: AQotM Nomination -Re: Athiesm is Impossible |
13 Nov 2005 11:25:22 AM |
|
|
The other Donald wrote:
<zamboni30000@knowshpamatyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:gridn1t2h4lnvlk1r806nm5jb81sbfc5ob@4ax.com...
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 04:23:16 GMT, "Greg Flynn"
<bunpokeNOSPAM@verizon.net> wrote:
Athiesm posits that the universe wasn't created, therefore, it assumes
one
of two other possiblities.
1. The universe was created from nothing by nothing
2. The universe has always existed.
So, which do you believe:
1 God was created from nothing by nothing
2. God has always existed.
Why do you think its better to have an extra step to complicate
things? I mean, the universe actually exists, so one should feel
justified in speculating as to its origins. There's no reason to
believe that a goddiddit. Sure, it makes it easier for a simple mind
to explain the universe, but unfortunately it opens a whole new can of
worms. Starting with "Who created the creator?"
NOMINATED PORTION:
I'm willing to say "I don't know , some day I might." I am not willing
to fill in the cracks with god-spackle. Sure it's harder my way, but I
*am* willing to use my brain.
--
zamboni #2139
Seconds, anyone? ...anyone?
Thirded!!!
--
-Donald in Austin
AA #2104
Apatriot #22
Atheist FF/EMT
....and ordained minister
Stork pin recipient: May 1, 2003 -Madelyn
-Mr. Worf, set phasers on "***** You" and fire at will. -Doc Smartass
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bear" |
|
| Title: Re: Athiesm is Impossible |
12 Nov 2005 11:49:38 PM |
|
|
zamboni wrote
: "Greg Flynn"
wrote:
:
: >Athiesm posits that the universe wasn't created, therefore, it assumes
one
: >of two other possiblities.
: >
: >1. The universe was created from nothing by nothing
: >2. The universe has always existed.
:
: So, which do you believe:
:
: 1 God was created from nothing by nothing
: 2. God has always existed.
:
: Why do you think its better to have an extra step to complicate
: things? I mean, the universe actually exists, so one should feel
: justified in speculating as to its origins. There's no reason to
: believe that a goddiddit. Sure, it makes it easier for a simple mind
: to explain the universe, but unfortunately it opens a whole new can of
: worms. Starting with "Who created the creator?"
:
: I'm willing to say "I don't know , some day I might." I am not willing
: to fill in the cracks with god-spackle. Sure it's harder my way, but I
: *am* willing to use my brain.
Well said.
--
Bear
There but for circumstances go I.
It is the right and the duty of every person to rationally and skeptically
examine a proposition before accepting it, and if that proposition turns out
to not be supported by logic or evidence, it is the mark of a mature mind to
be able to set it aside and face life as it really is.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: Athiesm is Impossible |
13 Nov 2005 06:20:59 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 04:23:16 GMT, "Greg Flynn"
<bunpokeNOSPAM@verizon.net> wrote:
Athiesm posits that the universe wasn't created, therefore, it assumes one
of two other possiblities.
It is amazing! This fool continues to repeat the same lie. He has no
respect for himself or for others.
snip
Thomas P.
"Life must be lived forwards but understood backwards"
(Kierkegaard)
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
