It's teh same evidence, different interpretation. Isn't there an internet meme picture that could be posted about that?
Thank you for disentangling the knights-move in your thought process. As I suspected, you seek to use an evolutionary social advance as "proof" for your god hypothesis. It fails.
Now that is an extremely bigoted and ignorant thing to say, even for an alleged Christian. Making up stories and falsifying statements is called lying, something forbidden by your supposed Christian creed. Where is it that you claim that those who do this will be sent? Be on your way.
??..very bizarre response.. with no basis, that i can see. Why the ad hominem? Why the phony caricature? Why the false accusations, for this illustration of 'mockery' from atheists? IS that not the topic? ..probably better if we do not attempt any rational conversation.. it seems you react with hostile anger if any of your sacred cows of atheistic belief are challenged. I'm sure you dish it out, with glee, but you don't seem to take it well. ..and why the attempt to interject 'Christian!' in your response? this post had nothing to do with christianity, but mocking from atheists, & the double standard CONSTANTLY displayed here. You demonstrate this double standard with your reply, whether you realize it, or not. It is ok for YOU to mock christians, but if anyone mocks YOUR beliefs, they will feel the consequences of your wrath.
Key phrase, "that I can see". You apparently see only want to see. Listen to only what you wish as displayed in your post. Attack when you are challenged and put forth false information to bolster what you think of as valid points. Hint, they are not valid, only bigoted. BTW, I only "attack" Christians when they first attack me. Any perceived "mockery" is in fact merely others disagreeing with you. Deal with it.
That is not arrogance. That is humility - stating that we do not kniw hiw everything works, and that we need evidencd. Arrogance is claiming one knows how something works without there being any evidence - or even in the face of evidence pointing to some other answer. Your "math" analogy doesn't change that. And, lots of things can't be hit by a hammer. An inch, a year, the theory of relativity, etc. And, i just don't get your dog thing. Yes, a dog can't figure out architecture. Yes, Christianity suggests man can not figure out god. Is that what you mean?
sure if you call capping the boundaries of knowledge lack of arrogance, pun certainly intended there are some excellent explanations but atheists cant be bothered actually learning something educational. http://www.politicalforum.com/index...atheism-part-2.496870/page-26#post-1068112352
Maybe it would be, were there any reason to believe conscience requires for its expression either cogitation or the perception of material stimuli. Things being what they are... I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. who the hell cares And just how do you imagine conscience qualifies as such when it's not a social phenomenon? Funny you should put that in quotes, seeing you're the only one to use the term in this conversation.
What else could conscience (or morality) be but a socially evolved trait? Emile Durkheim. The "Collective Conscience" would be a good primer for you.
Your meme: simply not the least bit true. Philosophy Is The Handmaid Of Theology . This excerpt following is but one comment on that famous dictum: Thomas Aquinas was born in the castle of Roccasecca, in southern Italy around the year 1225. His father was a nobleman and his mother was related to Emperor Frederick II. He Studied the liberal arts and at age 14 attended the University of Naples. Shortly after, he came to the conclusion that his desire was to become a Dominican monk. His parents were not happy with this and actually locked him in the castle tower for a year to prevent this. It was during this time that he intently studied the Bible and the Metaphysics by Aristotle. After being released, he headed for Paris to pursue his theological quest. Aquinas saw philosophy as a useful tool, but still placed more emphasis on learning the truth through faith. One of his main uses of philosophy was as a way to logically prove the existence of God, as well as understanding the way God operates. Also he felt that philosophy was not a threat to religion but that they were both a means to an end. The only difference between them is that philosophy deals with our natural world and what is visible, while religion deals with everything beyond the natural world and what is invisible. http://bukisa.com/articles/274572_st-thomas-aquinas-philosophy-as-the-handmaid-of-theology - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Once one is assured of God then theology rules in every way. Life is only a trial and what matters is one’s eternal destiny. There is nothing here to compare in importance. (imo)
A form of direct and private communication between God and the individual. You're welcome. I'm sure it would, if for some reason I wished to be indoctrinated with an intellectually and morally bankrupt conception of conscience.
thats pretty good, you know whats in a book without reading it, what other tricks do atheists have up their sleeve to reject knowledge?
from an academic perspective everything the board atheists post is pure useless trash, <101 with exception to 1 atheist anyway.
atheists assume that they have the ability to comprehend all things and the best they can come up with is the big bang, what was there to go bang is not relevant, that is arrogant because they are in fact more like the dog example and that causes them pain to think about.
I'll have to admit, the genesis story is far sexier. And, it has all the details, right down to when darkness was separated from light and where the ladies came from.
Cool. Since you have a direct line of communication to God, would you ask him a few questions for me ?
Still relying on ad hominem, rather than debate the topic... attack? my, my. Such fearsome words from someone who can dish it out, but howls with indignation if it comes back. Did you even notice the OP? It is dedicated TO mocking 'religion', and specifically, christianity. You have joined in with the mock fest with eager glee. Now you claim to be 'under attack!' ?? And call me a liar?? And a bigot?? Methinks my points were too pointed, & jabbed you in the nether regions, so you felt compelled to double down with the insults. But it is difficult to return witty insults if you have been pierced by Truth, so hostile anger comes out, instead... with the ad hom & false accusations, of course. Your assertions & accusations are without basis. You have not made a rational rebuttal to any points of reason, but illustrated some of the critiques of the OP, & religious mocking, in general. I called you out for accusing another poster of 'mocking' when his criticism was toward mocking of beliefs. I find it very bizarre that you responded with 'attack!', 'liar!', and 'christian!' Now you double down, & produce more irrational hostility & insults. I mostly like to understand the mysteries of the universe, & this kind of response remains a persistent, (and common), mystery of human behavior.
Very perceptive observation about 'indoctrination'. Who is NOT, 'indoctrinated' in some way? How do you KNOW, that what you believe is not just from indoctrination from someone else, with an agenda, or just the desire to control? Do the hypnotized lie?
