Is Atheism Irrational?

[Andyregs]

[Well theres a screen shot google boy.

 

And I am patronising?

 

 

 

I've never read the source/link that you provided..never heard of it and it doen't work for me..here is the link I used http://www.blueletterbible.org/faq/don_stewart/don_stewart_643.cfm a site I have been to many times. You'll note it's not the same as yours cos, get this, the internet has many sites that refer to the same info! Who'd have thought it eh?

 

You can call me many things but I don't lie and it's pretty low to call someone a liar just cos you don't like what they are posting. Still if it suits you to resort to accuasations of dishonesty go ahead

 

 

 

 

 

 

Incorrect...but if that's what you want think so be it

 

 

 

Really? All these pages of my thoughts including strong disdasgreements wehere I don't go along with the common view on many issues and I can't think for msyelf..your statement makes no sense

 

 

 

Did I? Would I? Sorry didn't realise I hadn't conformed to the Andyregs guidelines on using a forum..you should publish them . Hidden away? How is it hidden away?

 

 

 

I never said that you don't understand it..I told you that I believe that I do.

 

You seem confused

 

Its the same article word for word! The site i found it on has changed addresses since yesterday for some reason but it was still cached on my computer. Does it matter if you googled a different page. It still doesn't change anything. This is getting laughable. Even funnier that you must have googled something like 'what was god doing before the universe began' straight after what i posted. You not going to convince anyone that blue letter bible was a source of 'study'. You have done it before in a similar debate. You have said that i don't understand/get it countless times. In fact in one post where you say dawkins was a great read, you also tell me i don't understand and use my example of the flood as mass killing by god. When in fact he talks about it in the book. It seems that you will just argue the opposite of what i say half the time but this time your googling let you down.

[Andyregs]

Take a look here https://www.google.co.uk/#q=what+is+a+joke

 

http://www.onevalefan.co.uk/forum/member.php?78-JOHNNYAITCH

[JOHNNYAITCH]

You've read the source many times and yet you ask if its a real link. I call bull**** on that one.

 

I think you're very confused..the source I was referring to was obviously my source. Your source does not work for me hence the question.

 

I await the apology

[Andyregs]

I think you're very confused..the source I was referring to was obviously my source. Your source does not work for me hence the question.

 

I await the apology

 

ha ha ha amazing. What for? It was copied and pasted from the same article. Whether you got it from one site or your usual 'source of study, blue letter bible, its makes no difference. At least its a source now and not passed off as your own opinion I suppose. Shame because I always thought you 'got it'.

[JOHNNYAITCH]

Its the same article word for word!

 

If you say so, I'll belive you..as i said many links can lead to the same info.

 

The site i found it on has changed addresses since yesterday for some reason but it was still cached on my computer.[/quote

 

So I wasn't *****itting when i said it didn't work for me?

 

Does it matter if you googled a different page.

 

Does it matter It still doesn't change anything.

 

Yes it does

 

This is getting laughable. Even funnier that you must have googled something like 'what was god doing before the universe began' straight after what i posted.

 

I went straight to Blue Letter site having read something there on the matter previously..I liked what i read in terms of it ancapsuklating what i understand. but if you'd retaher I used what i think to be less effective wording...?

 

You not going to convince anyone that blue letter bible was a source of 'study'.

 

Not trying to convince you of anything..it's not important enpough for me to try to. I just tell you the truth and you will make your mind up

 

You have done it before in a similar debate.[/quote

 

I am not going to deny that I have ever done that

 

You have said that i don't understand/get it countless times.

 

Cos countless tiems you demonstrate that you do not

 

In fact in one post where you say dawkins was a great read, you also tell me i don't understand and use my example of the flood as mass killing by god. When in fact he talks about it in the book. It seems that you will just argue the opposite of what i say half the time but this time your googling let you down.

 

No I did not use the flood as an example of mass killing by God and neither did you..clearly it was mass killing..you claimed it was an example of God's indiscriminate killing when clearly it was not, it was in fact the complete opposite..again you miss the point and show that you don't understand.

 

It is the ultimate in arrogance to think that someone only disagrees for the sake of it...I dissgree when I believe or know that you are wrong.

 

If that's what you want to think then so be but your accusation of my dishonesty has been proven incorrect re the web URL not working for me so what can I say...if you want to go down that path then so be it

[JOHNNYAITCH]

ha ha ha amazing. What for? It was copied and pasted from the same article. Whether you got it from one site or your usual 'source of study, blue letter bible, its makes no difference. At least its a source now and not passed off as your own opinion I suppose. Shame because I always thought you 'got it'.

 

Your accusation that I was bull******** over the link not working for me and that i was querying if it was genuine

 

You've read the source many times and yet you ask if its a real link. I call bull**** on that one.

 

I never claimed it was my own. Had I wanted to do so I would have changed the wording to make it different and to make it 'sound' liike me..not that i would do that either

[JOHNNYAITCH]

http://www.onevalefan.co.uk/forum/member.php?78-JOHNNYAITCH

 

That's not a joke it's just my profile

 

Now here is a joke ..maybe you should read it ;) http://www.slideshare.net/andyregs/presentations

[Andyregs]

You misunderstand. i didn't mean bull**** on that the link couldn't be seen (I can see that easily), though i can see why it sounded like that. i mean that it was bull**** in general. That you saw my argument and thought, mmm I know an article blue letter bible that perfectly encapsulates word for word what i believe, so instead of saying it I will copy and paste it to save time.

As for dawkins, he even mentions the blameless animals being killed along with the humans.

Lastly, wow, you've really trawled that one out. Is this me too? http://www.yeearn.com/vip/home.php?mod=space&uid=4386

For the sake of everyone, put me on ignore and I'll do the same.

[Tone]

Tone there is a huge difference between common use of the term theory and what it means in science...you need to to grasp that when commenting on theories and facts That's been pointed out to you numerous times

 

No JA, as someone who does not claim to be knowledgeable in science, all I can do is try desparately to remember what I learned in GCE O-Level Chemistry almost 50 years ago. I thought (I don't claim, that's why I asked if there were any real scientists in the house) that a theory is something unproven and a law is a theory that HAS been proven. My mistake if I am wrong. But we're talking semantics somewhat, aren't we?

[Andyregs]

No JA, as someone who does not claim to be knowledgeable in science, all I can do is try desparately to remember what I learned in GCE O-Level Chemistry almost 50 years ago. I thought (I don't claim, that's why I asked if there were any real scientists in the house) that a theory is something unproven and a law is a theory that HAS been proven. My mistake if I am wrong. But we're talking semantics somewhat, aren't we?

 

Laws and theories are different things. Thats why gravity can be explained as a law and a theory. From my limited knowledge, a law describes and a theory explains. Theories do evolve, some however may not. The law just describes what we see. So in a way gravity can be a law and a theory....I think.

[Tone]

(1) which are you questioning, the scientific theory or Einstein?

 

Neither, just your definition of THEORY and LAW in the context of science. See my reply to JA.

 

(2) the are first hand evidence of lots of supernatural claims I'm sure you don't believe in. Everything from Mormonism to shape shifting lizards. The gospels are questionable, one I'm sure one either missed out the resurrection or had it added later. What evidence is there outside the bible. Such a huge event surely would have been written about, even from his rivals. And why is the majority of it written some time afterwards. On it's own it's as strong as evidence from the Book of Mormon or the Qur'an.

 

I don't see how you can dismiss the Gospels as "questionable" in quite so a perfunctory manner. Having studied them all in detail (am currently studying Matthew for the second time - a 30 week course) I have only found more and more insight and answered more and more questions as time has gone by. Ask any Bible scholar about the resurrection and I am sure you will be given the same answer as I gave. Read 1 Corinthians 15 - written sometime between the founding of the church at Corinth between 50 and 52 and Paul's arrest in Jerusalem between 55 and 58.

 

(3) I disagree, I challenged each one of your points. Is it not well reasoned to suggest the proper definition of a word? I've countered everything you've said in this debate, but you constantly try to make out that I don't, and that I 'don't understand', I dismiss things etc. I think my posts have had far more reasoned arguments an yourself to be honest. I've never once fallen back on dismissive 'you don't understand' comments, and instead when I believe you are wrong have said why.

 

If I believe you don't understand I shall say so, but I suspect that accusation has been offered more by my learned friend JA than by myself. ;)

 

(4) I'm sure Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, and pastafarians think he same for you.

 

Yes, true, as they are trying desperately to WORK their way to heaven. Do you believe in heaven, by the way? What do you think and say when someone close to you dies? I am curious when I see comments from people who most of the time don't believe in God saying, "RIP" and "I'm sure he/she is looking down on us", etc.

[Tone]

Laws and theories are different things. Thats why gravity can be explained as a law and a theory. From my limited knowledge, a law describes and a theory explains. Theories do evolve, some however may not. The law just describes what we see. So in a way gravity can be a law and a theory....I think.

 

You think?

 

Any scientists in the house.... Hello.... ;)

[Andyregs]

Neither, just your definition of THEORY and LAW in the context of science. See my reply to JA.

 

 

 

I don't see how you can dismiss the Gospels as "questionable" in quite so a perfunctory manner. Having studied them all in detail (am currently studying Matthew for the second time - a 30 week course) I have only found more and more insight and answered more and more questions as time has gone by. Ask any Bible scholar about the resurrection and I am sure you will be given the same answer as I gave. Read 1 Corinthians 15 - written sometime between the founding of the church at Corinth between 50 and 52 and Paul's arrest in Jerusalem between 55 and 58.

 

 

 

If I believe you don't understand I shall say so, but I suspect that accusation has been offered more by my learned friend JA than by myself. ;)

 

 

 

Yes, true, as they are trying desperately to WORK their way to heaven. Do you believe in heaven, by the way? What do you think and say when someone close to you dies? I am curious when I see comments from people who most of the time don't believe in God saying, "RIP" and "I'm sure he/she is looking down on us", etc.

 

But other religions will say their book is evidence and they can't all be true. So something a little more is needed. Extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence. But i don't think we will ever agree and just go round in circles.

I don't believe in heaven. I think we die and thats it. Not that I wish/hope it wasn't that way. Ive never said anyones 'looking down on me', though have said RIP, though I've never meant it in a religious way. More as a social norm I suppose. Some people say it to comfort others Im sure, whilst not necessarily believing it.

 

You think?

 

Any scientists in the house.... Hello.... ;)

 

The gravity bit i mean. Because there is newtons law and now einsteins theory of relativity. I do know that although a theory, it explains gravity better than newtons law. However Im no expert on einsteins relativity and won't pretend to be. Im limited to stephen hawkings book. The use of the word theory originally was however, wrong.

[Tone]

The gravity bit i mean. Because there is newtons law and now einsteins theory of relativity. I do know that although a theory, it explains gravity better than newtons law. However Im no expert on einsteins relativity and won't pretend to be. Im limited to stephen hawkings book. The use of the word theory originally was however, wrong.

 

So you believe Stephen Hawking's book but not the Bible? I would contend you don't understand either. Woops, there I've done a JA on you... ;)

 

Try reading Josephus.

[Andyregs]

So you believe Stephen Hawking's book but not the Bible? I would contend you don't understand either. Woops, there I've done a JA on you... ;)

 

Try reading Josephus.

 

If you are suggesting that the bible has as much evidence as what is written in stephen hawkings book then there is no point even debating anything. Which bit don't i understand out of interest?

What can josephus tell me that hawkings couldn't?