For debate:EarthScienceguy wrote: ...
The universe could not exist in the form that it is in unless there was an omnipresent, omnipotent, and omniscient God.
...
Please offer some means to confirm the referenced claim is true and factual.
Moderator: Moderators
For debate:EarthScienceguy wrote: ...
The universe could not exist in the form that it is in unless there was an omnipresent, omnipotent, and omniscient God.
...
Precisely.brunumb wrote: ↑Tue Jan 04, 2022 6:17 pmI read that and realised that I had seen similar scenarios described by many former Christians who had fought hard but eventually had to abandon their beliefs.Sherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Tue Jan 04, 2022 4:39 pm When I abandoned atheism many years ago, the difficult part of that was not the reasoning, the science, the rationalizing, it was my own stubborn unwillingness to admit I might have been wrong, might have been misled, that was where all resistance stemmed from, preservation of existing belief had been my priority, I even lied to myself about it, that was the hard part, fighting myself.
This is a good observation, many have drawn attention to the similarities between the prevailing Catholic authorities at the time of Galileo and some of today's vocal exponents of atheism.William wrote: ↑Tue Jan 04, 2022 6:48 pmPrecisely.brunumb wrote: ↑Tue Jan 04, 2022 6:17 pmI read that and realised that I had seen similar scenarios described by many former Christians who had fought hard but eventually had to abandon their beliefs.Sherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Tue Jan 04, 2022 4:39 pm When I abandoned atheism many years ago, the difficult part of that was not the reasoning, the science, the rationalizing, it was my own stubborn unwillingness to admit I might have been wrong, might have been misled, that was where all resistance stemmed from, preservation of existing belief had been my priority, I even lied to myself about it, that was the hard part, fighting myself.
That is why I mention from time to time how similar the opposing positions are to one another. Materialists and Religionists appear to be at odds, but do harbor the same-type of mind-set and the existence of both positions is that which make said positions appear to be necessary, because without each, the other is fairly pointless.
Like two sides of the very same coin.
Sherlock appears to be other than a religionist, as far as I can tell from what he/she has already contributed to the debates...
Being a theist is not always about beliefs.
Sherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Thu Dec 30, 2021 4:48 pm ...
OK - anything is possible in principle unless we can prove without question that it is not.
...
Ahh the old ridicule argument, how impressive.JoeyKnothead wrote: ↑Tue Jan 11, 2022 10:58 amSherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Thu Dec 30, 2021 4:48 pm ...
OK - anything is possible in principle unless we can prove without question that it is not.
...
If you take offense at the southern accent, I can't help ya a bit.Sherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Thu Jan 13, 2022 11:46 amAhh the old ridicule argument, how impressive.JoeyKnothead wrote: ↑Tue Jan 11, 2022 10:58 amSherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Thu Dec 30, 2021 4:48 pm ...
OK - anything is possible in principle unless we can prove without question that it is not.
...
I really have no idea what you're talking about, have I said something that you disagree with?JoeyKnothead wrote: ↑Thu Jan 13, 2022 5:06 pmIf you take offense at the southern accent, I can't help ya a bit.Sherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Thu Jan 13, 2022 11:46 amAhh the old ridicule argument, how impressive.JoeyKnothead wrote: ↑Tue Jan 11, 2022 10:58 amSherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Thu Dec 30, 2021 4:48 pm ...
OK - anything is possible in principle unless we can prove without question that it is not.
...
My point is, all you've got is "it's possible".
Not even a clue, even though I explained the problem within this thread?Sherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Fri Jan 14, 2022 11:06 amI really have no idea what you're talking about, have I said something that you disagree with?JoeyKnothead wrote: ↑Thu Jan 13, 2022 5:06 pmIf you take offense at the southern accent, I can't help ya a bit.Sherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Thu Jan 13, 2022 11:46 amAhh the old ridicule argument, how impressive.JoeyKnothead wrote: ↑Tue Jan 11, 2022 10:58 amSherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Thu Dec 30, 2021 4:48 pm ...
OK - anything is possible in principle unless we can prove without question that it is not.
...
My point is, all you've got is "it's possible".
Please quote the sentence I posted that you are in disagreement with, enough of the paraphrasing please, lets stick with facts what specific statement of mine are you objecting to?JoeyKnothead wrote: ↑Fri Jan 14, 2022 12:05 pmNot even a clue, even though I explained the problem within this thread?Sherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Fri Jan 14, 2022 11:06 amI really have no idea what you're talking about, have I said something that you disagree with?JoeyKnothead wrote: ↑Thu Jan 13, 2022 5:06 pmIf you take offense at the southern accent, I can't help ya a bit.Sherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Thu Jan 13, 2022 11:46 amAhh the old ridicule argument, how impressive.JoeyKnothead wrote: ↑Tue Jan 11, 2022 10:58 amSherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Thu Dec 30, 2021 4:48 pm ...
OK - anything is possible in principle unless we can prove without question that it is not.
...
My point is, all you've got is "it's possible".
The point is that declaring something possible is a poor means of determining fact.
Sherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Fri Jan 14, 2022 2:17 pmYou were quoted, with a site reference, within the very post to which you just responded. It's included in your response wondering just what sentence I was agetting atSherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Thu Dec 30, 2021 4:48 pm ...
OK - anything is possible in principle unless we can prove without question that it is not.
...
...Please quote the sentence I posted that you are in disagreement with, enough of the paraphrasing please, lets stick with facts what specific statement of mine are you objecting to?Joey Knothead wrote: Not even a clue, even though I explained the problem within this thread?
The point is that declaring something possible is a poor means of determining fact.
All I had to do was actually read your post, and by my incredible powers of reading, therein did I find the sentence.