OzSpen,

“First, since you 'assume', that is a presupposition and I would propose a hypothesis and test it for validation or falsification from the available historical evidence regarding Jesus.”

The word ‘assume’ is used in the sense of hypothetical.

“However, the worldwide evidence indicates that your first statement does not define the nature and personhood of who Jesus is…”

Again, this is a hypothetical and it means any god of any believer. Each can answer in their own manner. Strange but expected but none have. Your skirting around it is noticeable. Answer it about the god in which you believe.

I would not follow the words of Jesus if they did not tie up with the highest ethical standards unless he pointed out he would torture me for eternity if I didn’t. I would accept he is god and would no longer be an atheist, of course!.

Repeat mode on: Even if Anthony Flew was very well known by all atheists, and he wasn’t, his words would not be accepted just because he is an atheist. You obviously have not looked at anything but religious nonsense about him.

This is funny. I say the divine Jesus is a myth only believed by Christians and you offer proof that he is not, from a Christian view.

David

worldwatcher,

“....even poor David, as I think he really needs some TLC from us - or someone.”

Sorry to disappoint you, but I get lots of TLC and you know what, it’s not from imaginary friends.

David

Shockadelic,

“But to claim “no aliens exists” because you don't see any evidence would be preposterous!.”

Who is making that claim? There is a good chance that simple alien life exists and a possibility that intelligent aliens might also. There are both kinds of that life on earth, although the latter category is overstated going by some of the posts on this thread and the earth is in the universe which has trillions of planets.

The huge distances probably preclude alien visits and therefore evidence is needed to verify claims of abduction and visitations.

David

AJ Philips>> Here you go again with the absolutes. Nothing about atheism says or necessitates 100% certainty. This is something you have invented yourself.<<

Dunno AJ, all the reference books I have use the term nonbeliever when describing the word atheist. But interestingly the thesaurus has the terms “doubter” and “nonbeliever” as alternatives. Nonbeliever is pretty absolute to me whereas doubter is not an absolute. Agnostic also has the same alternatives in the thesaurus but broad alternatives are given a run given it is a thesaurus.

But at the end of the day there are two words, atheist and agnostic, and each have a specific application. Agnostic is best served by the word doubt, meaning no judgment has been made. Atheist engenders nonbeliever, an absolute position. In the context of this thread, atheists have declared there is no god, they are wrong footed intellectually given they want to argue their point intellectually.

A self proclaimed atheist such as ALoFI cannot disprove the creator scenario, but chooses to take a PERSONAL stance on the subject. Perhaps he had a Catholic upbringing, or he got molested by the priest…….but for whatever reason ALoFI hates religions and does not consider the possibility of a god, it is not an intellectually intelligent position to take. It is a personal observation driven psychologically.

By the way, ALoFI, I am still waiting for your top ten “there is indisputably no god” reasoning’s

Shockadelic,

“That if you disregard people's reported experiences, therefore those people are liars?”

They could be mistaken, deluded and yes, or liars. What would you class the people as who wrote other holy books?

“You don't have to. But you can't then claim it's all false/non-existent!”

Who does?

Please read what I have said about your Hitler analogy.

Please read what others and I have said about agnosticism.

“Why *wouldn't* you listen to what Jesus said if you are ASSUMING HE'S GOD!?”

That is answering a question with a question.

“He would *still* be God, you just wouldn't care. That still wouldn't justify an “atheist” identity, would it?”

I wouldst be an atheist under that circumstance. That would be stupid.

“Why? Is he dangerous? Should deviant thought be automatically punished or “treated”?”

Yes, you are correct; I left out possibly, ‘would possibly be locked up. It was a joke with a serious message. I’ll be less subtle in future.

“It also doesn't make them false.”

You are correct. Of course, billions of people follow what you think are false claims which you wouldn't and they wouldn't follow what they consider are false claims by you. They are called every other religion except Christianity.

“Since none of these beliefs can be proved true, NONE can be definitely said to be false either.”

Then, why did you ‘choose’ the one you are now defending?

Now we have been through this stuff, can you answer the question thanks.

David

sonofgloin,

“A self proclaimed atheist such as ALoFI cannot disprove the creator scenario, but chooses to take a PERSONAL stance on the subject. Perhaps he had a Catholic upbringing, or he got molested by the priest…….but for whatever reason ALoFI hates religions and does not consider the possibility of a god, it is not an intellectually intelligent position to take. It is a personal observation driven psychologically.”

So many wrong assumptions and so little time!

The burden of proof is on those proposing there is a creator. I have no reason whatsoever to take a ‘personal’ stance about being an atheist. Yes, I had a Catholic upbringing and as stated it was interesting. No, I was not molested by a priest although a Brother did take interest in me but that never led to any misconduct. The Atheist Foundation of Australia does not hate religion. It is opposed to those parts of religion that harm many in the human race. One of the harms is to the many of its adherents who become very bitter and stroppy when questioned about their ‘faith’. They become angry and irrational. Depending on the historical position of any religion, it can even lead to killing others who don’t believe the same as they do.

Atheists consider the god idea is a possibility albeit a very small possibility. Atheists also consider that fairies are a possibility but a very small possibility. Possibilities are a philosophical stance everyone takes. In reality, some people choose the highest probability. Others, such as religious believers, choose the lowest possibility.

Are you saying that atheists are driven to be atheists by bad experience? That is total bollocks and only demonstrates you are cocooned in a fantasyland of religious making.

Your final question is one of desperation. You have to prove your creator god exists. That is why I am an atheist because no one ever has.

Say this again and I will consider you are incapable of rational thought. I could have used other than ‘rational thought’ but it is the Christmyth season of goodwill.

David

David, thanks for your reply. Your position is not as steadfast with the inclusion of the word “possibilities”….and that is all I have been bleating on about. My first post was simply a comment on semantics….in fact semantics is almost exclusively all I have written about.

I started with this:
>> Merry festive season David. Just a seasonal comment re Xmas and religions.

The term atheist is a logical nonsense, as is the term theist. How can you be a committed believer or non believer with absolutely no proof one way or the other?

Agnostic is the descriptive the thinking man goes with I believe.<<

And the rest was a debate about semantics, with AJ primarily, but I did think that given your willful provocation you would have some secret weapon of rebuttal for the Christians other than “The burden of proof is on those proposing there is a creator”.

Re your comments that religions pits human against human…..sure it does, as do red hair, skin colour, gene pool, greed, jealousy, financial status etc etc.. Religion being the great divider of humanity can be rebutted deed for deed action for action by positive outcomes due to the moral foundation that religions bring to cultures.

Anyway……Merry Chrismyth to you my heathen brother…..lol.

David,

David: <<Again, this is a hypothetical and it means any god of any believer. Each can answer in their own manner. Strange but expected but none have. Your skirting around it is noticeable. Answer it about the god in which you believe.>>

I’m not interested in pursuing your hypothetical concept of God as it is nothing more than trying to get conversation going with me. I’m skirting around NOTHING. The Trinitarian Lord God Almighty in whom I believe has stated this of your atheism: ‘The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, their deeds are vile; there is no one who does good’ (Psalm 14:1 NIV).

The biblical worldview as described in the Christian Scriptures fits like a hand in glove with the world around me – I see it’s beauty and its ugliness. I have recently retired after 34 years in family counselling, the last 17 years full-time. I see the beauty and ugliness in human beings (including myself) and God has told us that that is exactly the way it is in the Scriptures:

‘For you [the Lord] created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you [the Lord] because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well’ (Psalm 139:13-14 NIV).

‘The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands. 2 Day after day they pour forth speech; night after night they reveal knowledge. 3 They have no speech, they use no words; no sound is heard from them. 4 Yet their voice goes out into all the earth, their words to the ends of the world. In the heavens God has pitched a tent for the sun. 5 It is like a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, like a champion rejoicing to run his course. 6 It rises at one end of the heavens and makes its circuit to the other; nothing is deprived of its warmth’ (Psalm 19:1-6 NIV).

(Part 1 continued in Part 2)