If there is no God. Then someone explain life.

[alexxmedeiros]

They are two different things, I think.

You should try thinking sometime. I think it's more intellectually honest than claiming you know something.

Are you certain about that? Or could you be wrong?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mr.Obvious]

Are you certain about that? Or could you be wrong?

I could be wrong.

I don't know.

I think.

How long do you want to keep on dancing this dance? Does any of this have a point? If so is it coming up soon?
You choose to know what you know, and could still be wrong about that. Big whoop? I'll stick to thinking.

[alexxmedeiros]

I could be wrong.

I don't know.

I think.

How long do you want to keep on dancing this dance? Does any of this have a point? If so is it coming up soon?
You choose to know what you know, and could still be wrong about that. Big whoop? I'll stick to thinking.

You can't know what I can know if you could be wrong about everything you claim to know. You literally can't know anything. You have given up knowledge and there fore are reduced to absurdity. You can't have knowledge without God, in fact all you can have is absurdity.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mr.Obvious]

You can't know what I can know if you could be wrong about everything you claim to know. You literally can't know anything. You have given up knowledge and there fore are reduced to absurdity. You can't have knowledge without God, in fact all you can have is absurdity.

I think I have my thoughts.

And I think you think you have a point in there somewhere. But I don't think you do.

[SGOS]

Would you be able to answer my question?

In the context of my question, I'm asking if it's impossible for God to exist, be real, be true.

Most Christians posit a fairly well defined, but highly self contradictory god, so possible but not very possible.  Maybe one chance in billions.  If he's defined as a mist that permeates everything, but does not interact, the chances go up to "probably not."

To be real is to be actually existing and not imagined.

Without empirical evidence, a god can only be imagined.  There is no other way to claim his existence.

This is why theists all point to some sort of woo as a proof substitute.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

If you could be wrong about everything you claim to know, then you can't know anything. If you can't know anything you can't know what I do or do not know.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quibbles. Did you swallow a Jesuit or something?

[alexxmedeiros]

I think I have my thoughts.

And I think you think you have a point in there somewhere. But I don't think you do.

More absurdity, further proving my point. If you wish to choose absurdity you are free to do so. Wisdom belongs to Jesus and if you wish to find understanding, ask of God.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[alexxmedeiros]

Quibbles. Did you swallow a Jesuit or something?

A you certain that it's "quibbles" or could you be wrong about that?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[alexxmedeiros]

Most Christians posit a fairly well defined, but highly self contradictory god, so possible but not very possible.  Maybe one chance in billions.  If he's defined as a mist that permeates everything, but does not interact, the chances go up to "probably not."

Without empirical evidence, a god can only be imagined.  There is no other way to claim his existence.

This is why theists all point to some sort of woo as a proof substitute.

Evidence presupposes truth. What is truth?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SGOS]

Evidence presupposes truth. What is truth?

Truth can not be determined without evidence.

[alexxmedeiros]

Truth can not be determined without evidence.

I'm not asking how you determine truth. I'm asking what is truth. Truth is what corresponds to reality right?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Gawdzilla Sama]

A you certain that it's "quibbles" or could you be wrong about that?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A me don't make typos.

[alexxmedeiros]

A me don't make typos.

Ok so your absolutely certain... how do you know that?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mike Cl]

I see you ignored the part where I expose your self refuting argument about absolutes.

I'm here because I want to expose to you the folly of the atheistic worldview.

Everyone has presuppositions including you and I can point them out to you if you are unaware of them.

The problem is not whether or not we have presuppositions but if they are true or not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You are about as dumb as a stump, aren't you?  You are going to 'expose' the folly of the atheistic worldview????  My, what a blowhard you are.  You are going to disprove my world view using your fictitious world view.  You have offered not one fact to support your fiction.  You ask the same question over and over even when it is answered.  And you would not know a fact if you saw one.

[alexxmedeiros]

You are about as dumb as a stump, aren't you?  You are going to 'expose' the folly of the atheistic worldview????  My, what a blowhard you are.  You are going to disprove my world view using your fictitious world view.  You have offered not one fact to support your fiction.  You ask the same question over and over even when it is answered.  And you would not know a fact if you saw one.

That's exactly what happened. You literally told me that you absolutely do not believe in absolutes.

Do you see the problem there?

The proof of my position is that without God you are reduced to absurdity, which we see when you claim "there are absolutely no absolutes."

But again my question is "How do you know anything to be true?" You don't.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk