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.
Originally posted by adjensen
Originally posted by Student X
reply to post by StlSteve
I'm just using the quote to make a point. Settle down, tough guy.
And it's my quote anyway, lol.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Originally posted by Student X
Fine. I don't care who said it. My point still stands.
Originally posted by bogomil
reply to post by adjensen
You wrote:
["There are some schools of thought (mostly Calvinist, but a number of other Protestant views, as well,) that say that a non-believer is absolutely, totally unable to believe, regardless of how much they would like to believe, because God has intentionally not granted them the grace of faith."]
Have always found that one very funny. The watchmaker universe, so similar to the reductionist materialist universe.
Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by Student X
Well, you were shown that an atheist didn't post that and you've not retracted your defamatory statements against atheists...so what's with the intellectual dishonesty? If you're going to use this quote anyway, you're just using a poorly-constructed straw man made from isolated, out-of-context theistic statements and then labeling it "atheist" and probably drawing an angry face with pointy teeth on it.
The point is that the claim has some level of testing behind it, while theistic claims that make massive reality claims, including but not limited to the intervention of a supernatural force in defiance of the laws of physics into the natural world, are testable yet yield no data that provide evidence in favor of the claims.
Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
Now, sure I could fake all of that, but I could attempt to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.
The point is that the claim has some level of testing behind it, while theistic claims that make massive reality claims, including but not limited to the intervention of a supernatural force in defiance of the laws of physics into the natural world, are testable yet yield no data that provide evidence in favor of the claims.
Quoting excluded to prevent people from accidentally misquoting things.
Originally posted by adjensen
In other words, your testimony is evidence, in itself. Whether I take it as such, though, depends on the conclusions that I've come to about you, and about whatever it is that you're claiming. Because I have seen things in my life that point to the supernatural, I'm going to be more accepting of such claims than someone who has never seen such things. Whether they are actual events or simply the result of a fanciful imagination doesn't matter all that much, because they are real enough to me, the one who experienced them.
Originally posted by adjensen
Based on personal experience, I guess that it depends on the "wish" part of your statement. Most heavy maths and sciences are not something that one picks up on the weekends, though if I can learn the History of Greek Mathematics on my days off, I guess that there's hope for most people.
But there are many fields and discoveries that require an effective lifetime of study and experimentation to comprehend, and those would absolutely be over the head of someone who hadn't done the work. That's not elitism, just a simple fact, somewhat akin to your chances of becoming a professional hockey player being pretty slim if you didn't start playing when you were three.
Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
And the simultaneous existence of 1.9999999999999999999999999999999 and 2 have nothing to do with this discussion.
Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
How is that 'CIRCLE LOGIC'? Circular arguments go "This book is true because God says it's true and God is right because this book says its right!"
I'm not making a circle, my argument is fairly linear.
Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
I have argued with MMIS in at least two threads and nothing I present as evidence satisfies his taste buds.
Not only that but he just likes to argue for the sake of arguing.
Originally posted by Noncompatible
While i agree with the hockey statement, I'll choose to disagree with the lifetime study part required to comprehend.
Originally posted by adjensen
Take miracles, for instance. Lots of weird stuff happens -- people who undergo spontaneous remission from terminal disease, and doctors testify that they "have no idea how it happened." We can test the person and see that, yes, they don't seem to be dying any more, but there's no way to test and see why not.
Originally posted by Lucifer777
This statement allegedly attributed to the religious fanatic, exorcist and fake healer, Jesus, has disproven over and over, so many times in human history and every Christian knows in their rational mind that it is simply ridiculous;