Report, edit, etc...Posted by Neiji on 2005-02-09 at 18:55:09
Exactly. I have seen NO evidence so far that proves God doesn't exist...
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MillenniumArmy on 2005-02-09 at 19:03:18
We see no evidence which corroborates the fact that God is just abstract and nonexistance and we never will.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Mini Moose 2707 on 2005-02-09 at 19:46:24
cfro, I don't know who taught you Christianity, but Catholics aren't supposed to take the Bible literally. Do I have to give my teaching science out of an English book example again?
Whether or not life is predetermined is inconsequential. Someones faces two choices. They do one, "you were going to do that anyway". They do two, "you were going to do that anyway". You can spew the same garbage about either decision no matter what happens, and this can be applied in a larger scale to all actions we make. Thus, "predetermination" seems to be the case AFTER one takes the specified action, which makes absolutely no sense. The only way predetermination could exist is if there was a way to see the actions BEFORE they happened, which is impossible. And that's why it doesn't matter at all.
Whether or not life is predetermined is inconsequential. Someones faces two choices. They do one, "you were going to do that anyway". They do two, "you were going to do that anyway". You can spew the same garbage about either decision no matter what happens, and this can be applied in a larger scale to all actions we make. Thus, "predetermination" seems to be the case AFTER one takes the specified action, which makes absolutely no sense. The only way predetermination could exist is if there was a way to see the actions BEFORE they happened, which is impossible. And that's why it doesn't matter at all.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Rhiom on 2005-02-20 at 02:47:03
QUOTE(Mini Moose 2707 @ Feb 9 2005, 06:46 PM)
Whether or not life is predetermined is inconsequential. Someones faces two choices. They do one, "you were going to do that anyway". They do two, "you were going to do that anyway". You can spew the same garbage about either decision no matter what happens, and this can be applied in a larger scale to all actions we make. Thus, "predetermination" seems to be the case AFTER one takes the specified action, which makes absolutely no sense. The only way predetermination could exist is if there was a way to see the actions BEFORE they happened, which is impossible. And that's why it doesn't matter at all.
[right][snapback]141667[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]141667[/snapback][/right]
predetermination is inconsequantial in application yes, but not on moral basis. If i am balmed for something i wanna be damn sure that i choose it and that someone didnt choose it for me. what injustice it would be to be determined to go to hell.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Mr.Kirbycode774 on 2005-02-20 at 18:48:02
QUOTE(Drj12 @ Feb 7 2005, 03:45 PM)
Ok, the future is predetermined, no matter how hard you try to change it. Just imagine for a moment that we could traved through time. Say I went foreward in time 5 minutes and saw myself spilling milk. Say then I go back in time and dont spill the milk. The future was already predetermined, but the thing i saw when i traveled in time is only one outcome. So, God really does give us free will, but he already knows the outcome of all our actions. He can know every single possible outcome of every situation but lets you make the decision.
[right][snapback]140369[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]140369[/snapback][/right]
I agree!, except for one part. If you go into the future 5 minutes you can't see yourself spill the milk because there would be a 5 minute gap of where you did not "exist". In other words, if you could go into the future you couldn't see your future self, but if you went into the past you could see your past self because it already happened. But still, he knows every outcome of every situation but lets you make the decision.
QUOTE(MillenniumArmy @ Feb 9 2005, 04:03 PM)
We see no evidence which corroborates the fact that God is just abstract and nonexistance and we never will.
[right][snapback]141628[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]141628[/snapback][/right]
I know you've heard this about 35 times now Millennium, but burden of proof! We make an affirmative claim and they make a skeptical claim about us, so therefore we have to make proof. BUT I see two problems with this.
1) We've had this debate of Jesus for TWO THOUSAND YEARS! I would think they would actually check for themselves by now, since they're more "logically enabled" than us. They should easily be able to find the evidence they need and be on their way.
2) Atheists say they make no affirmative claim. Don't believe that @#$#. They either must make an affirmative claim of ignorance (which is agnostic) or an affirmative claim in relative humanism or Darwinism. And how come evolutionists can't produce evidence??? Fossils ironically hurt their case instead of help them. Ever seen the famous skull progression?
QUOTE(Book: "I don't have enough faith to be an athiest")
99 percent of the biology of any organism resides in its soft anatomy, which is inaccessible in a fossil. So evolutionists take the 1% and use the other 99% as lee-way for creating their entire "missing links" from a single tooth. "To take a line of fossils and claim that they represent a lineage is not a scientific hypothesis that can be tested, but an assertion that carries the same validity as a bedtime story-amusing, perhaps even instructive, but not scientific."
This book is very logical. You should get one today! 
Report, edit, etc...Posted by KillerDrill900 on 2005-02-20 at 19:15:55
well if hes controling our lives why are we living anyways nothing to do and must be very boring XD
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MillenniumArmy on 2005-02-20 at 23:18:57
QUOTE
I know you've heard this about 35 times now Millennium, but burden of proof! We make an affirmative claim and they make a skeptical claim about us, so therefore we have to make proof. BUT I see two problems with this.
Not really on us, but on God.
Really, we cant say who has the Burden of Proof. According to Cheeze, whoever makes assumptions has the Burden of Proof upon them. Now i find it extremely ironic how the atheists/agnostics claim they made no assumptions/claims of God's nonexistence and place the burden of proof on us where we, christians, could say the burden of proof is really on them. Under what circumstances do they say burden of proof is on us not them? They dont know for sure God doesn't exist and they haven't proven it either.
Each and everytime i asked them for proof of God's nonexistence, they just simply elude my questoin. Everytime i asked them whether they could answer it or not, they know they can't answer it so they'd use the excuse saying that the burden of proof is on us, not them. Damn, how hard is it just to get a simple yes or no?
QUOTE
1) We've had this debate of Jesus for TWO THOUSAND YEARS! I would think they would actually check for themselves by now, since they're more "logically enabled" than us. They should easily be able to find the evidence they need and be on their way.
True, but see i don't think they really want proof of Jesus' existence. They just want to prove us wrong. They want us to dig ourselves a trap and succumb to their ways. All they want is to show us that they're right and we're wrong about Jesus by placing the Burden of Proof on us.
QUOTE
2) Atheists say they make no affirmative claim. Don't believe that @#$#. They either must make an affirmative claim of ignorance (which is agnostic) or an affirmative claim in relative humanism or Darwinism. And how come evolutionists can't produce evidence??? Fossils ironically hurt their case instead of help them. Ever seen the famous skull progression?
Never did, never will. Unique...