It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Dear Atheists: I will prove to you that there is a Creator to the universe. Come debate me.

page: 6
36
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Konduit
Whenever I see this debate I just think of what the late great Carl Sagan said on the subject.

"An atheist is someone who is certain that God does not exist, someone who has compelling evidence against the existence of God. I know of no such compelling evidence. Because God can be relegated to remote times and places and to ultimate causes, we would have to know a great deal more about the universe than we do now to be sure that no such God exists. To be certain of the existence of God and to be certain of the nonexistence of God seem to me to be the confident extremes in a subject so riddled with doubt and uncertainty as to inspire very little confidence indeed."

Carl Sagan Personal Life and Beliefs.


And here we have a logical position.




posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Konduit

From a purely physical and scientific point of view, that was actually a very concise, logical, clear and open to all possibilities unknown to science quote from him.
I always thought he was an athiest.


Anyway, even being someone who does believe in God, I do so for reasons which are conpletely personal and spiritual. There will never be a way to PROVE God, it's that way for a reason.
(in my opinion)
edit on 2-8-2015 by Wookiep because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Konduit
Whenever I see this debate I just think of what the late great Carl Sagan said on the subject.

"An atheist is someone who is certain that God does not exist, someone who has compelling evidence against the existence of God. I know of no such compelling evidence. Because God can be relegated to remote times and places and to ultimate causes, we would have to know a great deal more about the universe than we do now to be sure that no such God exists. To be certain of the existence of God and to be certain of the nonexistence of God seem to me to be the confident extremes in a subject so riddled with doubt and uncertainty as to inspire very little confidence indeed."

Carl Sagan Personal Life and Beliefs


Carl Sagan was a brilliant man but I would define Atheists as "people who require evidence in order to believe."

There are extremists in every group but I don't think the majority of Atheists are saying "there is absolutely no god and I have evidence to back it up!"


edit on 8/2/2015 by Answer because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Answer

Well at least you're not just redudant anymore.
Now you're completely obvious as well.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: DeadSeraph




Rare, but possible.

You may want to reconsider.
Read the thread title.


I am fully aware of the OP's fallacy. I pointed it out myself on the first page. I'm just not sure why this subject always descends into asshattery. It's interesting to me that so many people felt the author of the thread was "trolling". I didn't really see any indications of "trolling". Just a poorly thought out thread title.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:31 PM
link   
a reply to: arimass101

You know honestly at this point i really give no f#cks as to whether god exists or not and do you want to know why? Because its existence really has no effect on my life or the choices i make. I am my own god because i shape the world around me based on how i act period.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:32 PM
link   
a reply to: DeadSeraph



Just a poorly thought out thread title.

Not to mention the false dichotomy presented as a logical argument.

Can there be a logical discussion of the topic? Maybe. I've never seen one on ATS and this OP does not present any evidence of changing that.




edit on 8/2/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: Answer

Well at least you're not just redudant anymore.
Now you're completely obvious as well.


I said I was going to try your method of taking lines out of context so I did.

It's really silly, isn't it?



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:33 PM
link   
I think it's a good discussion as well.

I mean I believe in god or a creator. I am not a Christian though. I've come to this belief from decades of living on this planet and more life experiences than you could imagine. I read extensively on this stuff including many metaphysical and atheist books. I mentioned Richard Dawkins earlier. I am open minded. As should we all be.

My belief in a creator my not pass a scientific test or be deemed logical by all, but I can't imagine putting more thought or study into it.
edit on 2-8-2015 by amazing because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: DeadSeraph
I am fully aware of the OP's fallacy. I pointed it out myself on the first page. I'm just not sure why this subject always descends into asshattery.


Well said,
because there's no known answer to the question, other than which is derived via the technique of deductive reasoning.





en.wikipedia.org...

Deductive reasoning links premises with conclusions. If all premises are true, the terms are clear, and the rules of deductive logic are followed, then the conclusion reached is necessarily true.

Deductive reasoning (top-down logic) contrasts with inductive reasoning (bottom-up logic) in the following way: In deductive reasoning, a conclusion is reached reductively by applying general rules that hold over the entirety of a closed domain of discourse, narrowing the range under consideration until only the conclusion(s) is left. In inductive reasoning, the conclusion is reached by generalizing or extrapolating from, i.e., there is epistemic uncertainty. Note, however, that the inductive reasoning mentioned here is not the same as induction used in mathematical proofs – mathematical induction is actually a form of deductive reasoning.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

It's made it 6 pages and we're starting to make progress?



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:34 PM
link   
a reply to: DeadSeraph




It's made it 6 pages and we're starting to make progress?

We have? Maybe a bit.
But has the OP contributed a jot?



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: DeadSeraph
I'm just not sure why this subject always descends into asshattery.


Because similar debates have happened so many times on ATS and nothing new is ever presented.

This horse is dead, buried, decomposed, fossilized, and on display in a museum dedicated to pointless topics but we're still beating it mercilessly.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: DeadSeraph




It's made it 6 pages and we're starting to make progress?

We have? Maybe a bit.
But has the OP contributed a jot?


His job was merely to wind us all up. He succeeded. LOL



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:36 PM
link   
a reply to: arimass101

not really a debate but a question. why did the creator make me ugly? why did he make it his plan to screw over some guy in life by making him unscrewable? I have no other redeeming qualities to make up for my looks and I sure ain't going anywhere in life. so why did he create me just to watch me fester? always wanted to know why that's part of the creators plan
edit on 2-8-2015 by BASSPLYR because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Answer
Carl Sagan was a brilliant man but I would define Atheists as "people who require evidence in order to believe."

There are extremists in every group but I don't think the majority of Atheists are saying "there is absolutely no god and I have evidence to back it up!"


Maybe you have Agnostic confused with Atheism. By definition being Agnostic means requiring irrefutable evidence before making a clear and concise judgment, while Atheism is the complete rejection of belief in the existence of deities.
edit on 2-8-2015 by Konduit because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:38 PM
link   
a reply to: arimass101

Let me help you with the science side of the debate.

Current scientific theory states the Universe had a beginning. What made it begin?

Multiverse, String Theory, Expanding and Collapsing theories can't be proven. So the scientific atheist has to have faith in one of these concepts.

There is also a few very simple, yet profound questions to ask ourselves.

Intelligence from the Intelligent?
Or Intelligence from Chaos?

Self Awareness from the Self Aware?
Or Self Awareness from Chaos?

Occums Razor, Intelligence and Self Awareness from an Intelligent and Self Aware source.

Your Op sounds a lot like the Hindu texts "The Upanishads". If you have not read it I would recommend it. It could help strengthen your argument.

The Lord of Love is within. No one can tell you exactly who the Lord of Love is but if you reflect on yourself you will find the Lord of Love within. The end of death, the beginning of Life.


edit on 2-8-2015 by Isurrender73 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: BASSPLYR


not really a debate but a question. why did the creator make me ugly? why did he make it his plan to screw over some guy in life by making him unscrewable? I have no other redeeming qualities to make up for my looks and I sure ain't going anywhere in life. so why did he create me just to watch me fester? always wanted to know why that's part of the creators plan


For the same reason he made ugly women.

Maybe you should lower your standards.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Answer

It's only silly if it's done without any purpose.



"An atheist is someone who is certain that God does not exist, someone who has compelling evidence against the existence of God. I know of no such compelling evidence. Because God can be relegated to remote times and places and to ultimate causes, we would have to know a great deal more about the universe than we do now to be sure that no such God exists. To be certain of the existence of God and to be certain of the nonexistence of God seem to me to be the confident extremes in a subject so riddled with doubt and uncertainty as to inspire very little confidence indeed."


RIP Carl



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Isurrender73


Multiverse, String Theory, Expanding and Collapsing theories can't be proven. So the scientific atheist has to have faith in one of these concepts.


Incorrect. You see, some people are actually able to say "I don't know" instead of simply choosing from a list of possibilities.

I know that the religious folks love to use the word "faith" and "atheist" in the same sentence but it isn't accurate.



new topics

top topics



 
36
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join