Over the course of time debating and crusading against atheists on the internet, I have found that they don't change.
They depend on a rigid doctrine of talking points which they rely on and when you don't play along with their script, they will either ignore you or they will spell it out for you, put words in your mouth to argue against.
And they always have something to say, even when they have nothing to say, these are the dawkins type.
Or "it's definitely not the God of your religion or a good God", these are the hitchens type.
I can safely say I way well above them now.
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
*I am way well above them now.
Keep telling yourself that.
I don't have to.
A mealy mouthed reply. Afro-Semitic ape religion from the bowels of Iraq.
>Is this really happening?
I can't believe it's true. I'm just as surprised as you.
blah blah blah. just show me proof that god exists if you're so tired of arguing homie. stop yapping already
The evidence/proof of God is the beginning of the universe.
Science tells of none, what we can observe and deduce is the *earliest known* state of our *observable* universe
I'm afraid progress without a beginning is impossible. And the universe is in a progression.
It's like being in the middle of something without ever having started.
Nonsensical, isn't it?
>progress without a beginning is impossible
Says who?
Reality.
No it doesn't?
Nothing truly starts, all always existed and simply transforms over time.
We are the ones putting limits to and between things making them have a start.
I could agree with the pic but that still doesn't avoid a beginning for a progress.
You still can't have a sequence of events without a beginning, that's just nonsensical.
When has that ever happened? It's not even conceivable.
How about a triangle with four sides?
What determines a sequence of events? You do, the observer, with your observer biases. The same that makes you say a room is empty when it is full of air and other particles. You, on purpose or not, omit. But that's how we can observe, by omitting. You'd be overloaded if you weren't.
For a movement to be made there needs to be a prior movement? Then there always was movement. No esoteric "prime mover" is needed at all.
There always was Everything, it just transformed and we named and put limits to the forms it took including ourselves.
What you're proposing is the equivalent of a race without a, well, beginning.
*being in the middle of a race
Race? What do you mean?
What I'm saying is "beginning and end" are human concepts developed to help them understand their environment but which aren't some kind of existential rules like you'd be quick to assume. Akin to colors
>The universe has a beginning
>Therefore unless you worship Jesus when you die you'll be tortured forever
What an absurd leap of logic
I'm guessing OP is one of the Christian posters constantly whining about atheists ruining the board with shitposts and doesn't see the irony.
I'm so confused on whether I should be a classical or presuppositional.
It's fun to harass them with presuppositional apologetics and remind them that all they are nothing but opinions but I also want to make a logical conclusion leading to God.
I'm torn apart.
>I also want to make a logical conclusion leading to God.
>I'm torn apart.
I also don’t have a logical conclusion leading to your god which is why I don’t believe in it. Not sure how you don’t understand this.
On one hand I'm putting God on trial but on the other I can convict him.
But does God need me convicting him? Much less put him on trial?
Shouldn't the atheist be reminded of their place? And of the consequence of their denial of the almighty?
Why should the be scot-free? Why give them a free pass?
Presuppositional apologetics puts the burden of solipsism on the atheist, solipsism which is a parody of atheism or atheists playing skepticism.
It's very satisfying.
>Presuppositional apologetics puts the burden of solipsism on the atheist, solipsism which is a parody of atheism or atheists playing skepticism.
It's very satisfying.
No one buys it man. If I’m too skeptical to believe in your god, you trying to make me more skeptical isn’t going to get me closer to believing in your god, it’s the opposite direction. Skepticism levels don’t need to be altered if you are correct, you would just need proof that your god is real.
What's the point if you can't prove anything due to your skepticism?
But to be able to prove anything will be a concession of the existence of God.
You locked yourself in a box. You can't have it both ways.
I was a Christian in my past, no one believed this. No one thought you needed god to prove anything. God was another thing about the universe that Christians believed was real.
You’ve conceded that you have no logical proof and you just use pre-supposition to annoy people.
Consequences are annoying, aren't they?
I don’t think you’re following. Anyone with a working brain can sort true from false.
>Anyone with a working brain can sort true from false.
Good, ok first test.
How do you know you're not a brain in a vat?
Maybe I am, who knows. How does this make prove your god is real? How does that not apply to Christians?
Now then how would you know what is true of false about objective reality if you can't even know whether you're not a brain in a vat?
>How does that not apply to Christians?
Revelation from God is the short answer.
>Revelation from God is the short answer.
Dumb answer. You could be a brain in a vat who thinks he got revelation from god.
Dumb objection. God can do anything, he is all powerful. Of course he can make you know things.
A technician operating the brain-in-a-vat's inputs could easily insert a text analogous or identical to the Bible and simulate a religious experience. Perhaps a god could make you know things in a way that would be indubitable (though I doubt it), but this ain't it.
Yeah, we are getting lost.
The Christian can know what we perceive to be real is indeed objective reality while the solipsist atheist can't.
How would the atheist know what is objectively real? That's the question.
>Yeah, we are getting lost.
No, you ran out of arguments so you're just repeating your claim.
This reminds me of the meme of the guy already losing before he even chose sides.
If you can't show me how you can know that you're not a brain in a vat, your presupp has nothing to offer me.
I already told you, revelation from God.
Your initial objection to it was basically "how would you know it's from God" which was BTFO by the reminder that God is all-powerful.
Your revelation is either the Bible, personal revelation, or both. All of these could be faked by a BiaV operator, so they're out.
The question is already answered ya moron. How is this still not registering?
P1: If god were real, he would provide you with a form of revelation that couldn't be faked by a BiaV operator.
P2: You weren't provided with revelation that couldn't be faked by a BiaV operator.
C: God isn't real.
Thanks for playing, you beat yourself.
What you’re doing is insisting we’re all brains in vats without proof or a logical conclusion and pre-supposing it’s true.
It's a question. It doesn't presuppose either.
Stop trying to dodge it.
The eternal dharma has be laughing at you all. All this bickering, where does it get you? What would you do if either side proved themselves right beyond a doubt? If the answer changes either way, you're living a slaves life.
I don't know if this needs to be spelled out but solipsism due to a consequence of denying God is very much a win for the theist.
It doesn’t work and it wouldn’t be a victory, you still wouldn’t be converting anyone. You would actually be moving that individual further from believing in your god because they wouldn’t believe anything.
>AHGH I CREATED EVERYTHING I DON’T LIKE
>NYAH HOW COULD THIS HAPPEN TO ME
>IT’S YOUR FAULT I MADE THIS
Atheism is typically a coming-of-age philosophy brought upon by growing up surrounded by wanton Protestantism i.e. the wrong religion.
The atheist would throw around their knowledge by definitions in an effort to appear to be able to have knowledge without God.
Don't fall for it.
This is how with just a little thought deeper than usual, you leave the midwittery that is atheism and realize the non-existence of God is nonsensical.
>They depend on a rigid doctrine of talking points which they rely on and when you don't play along with their script, they will either ignore you or they will spell it out for you, put words in your mouth to argue against.
Oh the irony
And then you proceeded to obfuscate the answer with a what if technician whatever.