Christianity vs Atheism

[The Reality Salesman01]

Is it going down?

[Kayenneh]

And I nominate Informative for Pidgeon of the Month (November that is, Gracie took the prize home this month)!

[The Reality Salesman01]

I'm not mistaken, you've clearly underestimated the statement. Congratulations, you've thought of mythological creatures, which CAN be proven to be unreal based on their nature. On the other hand, God can NOT be proven to be unreal, no one has done so. You've acknowledged God, good job. You cannot prove that He does not exist. I on the other hand can disprove your claims because they are MYTHOLOGICAL creatures, God is not.

I of course don't think that you mean to say what I've just read from you. You're not saying that something is likely true if it cannot be proven false, correct?

Anselm, one of the GREATEST Philosophical thinkers stated my first claim. Hence,by thinking of God, you've already acknowledged Him, you can choose to deny Him in your life, but you cannot deny the fact that God does no exist, no one can. How does this make someone dishonest? And I apologize that there are smarter people than you.

I don't question for a second your intelligence. You are clearly the better man to teach things of this sort. I just want to make sure I understood you correctly. Are you saying that a claim is authenticated as true once the subject of it has been uttered from the mouth of the one who objects it? Is this true in all cases or just with God? Excuse my ignorance and share with me your knowledge.

[Cinjin]

Unicorns.
Dragons.
Griffons.
Werewolves.
Vampires.

You are quite mistaken.

I'm not mistaken, you've clearly underestimated the statement.

I think you need to spend some time with a thesaurus. Why don't you go ahead and tell us all how one underestimates a statement? I've heard of people misunderstanding a statement. I've heard of people contemplating or ignoring a statement, but I've never heard of someone underestimating a statement. "Clearly Cogsworth, I underestimated that statement. I thought for sure it would never amount to anything, but low and behold, it went and grew up into an entire paragraph."

Congratulations, you've thought of mythological creatures, which CAN be proven to be unreal based on their nature. On the other hand, God can NOT be proven to be unreal, no one has done so.

Again, more painfully flawed logic there little guy. A dragon, for example, is a myth only because we haven't seen one, and unfortunately for you, your god shares the same attribute. Of course, we believe in neither, but it has absolutely nothing to do with their 'natures.'

You've acknowledged God, good job. You cannot prove that He does not exist. I on the other hand can disprove your claims because they are MYTHOLOGICAL creatures, God is not.

So, you can disprove a mythological creature because its a mythological creature? Excellent. I'll only need one piece of evidence than: Simply type that those alleged mythological creatures are MYTHOLOGICAL creatures in ALL CAPS and that will be sufficient for me. Dare I say, all of us will be convinced in the scientific process you have used to demonstrate your point, thus bringing us all that much closer to believing in your awesome and powerful god.

[max-greece]

"Congratulations, you've thought of mythological creatures, which CAN be proven to be unreal based on their nature. "

Only problem is - that Unicorns, and several other mythical creatures are mentioned in the bible - several times:

"God brought them out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn."—Numbers 23:22
"God brought him forth out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn."—Numbers 24:8
"His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth."—Deuteronomy 33:17
"Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib? Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee? Wilt thou trust him, because his strength is great? or wilt thou leave thy labour to him? Wilt thou believe him, that he will bring home thy seed, and gather it into thy barn?"—Job 39:9–12
"Save me from the lion's mouth; for thou hast heard me from the horns of unicorns."—Psalms 22:21
"He maketh them [the cedars of Lebanon] also to skip like a calf; Lebanon and Sirion like a young unicorn."—Psalms 29:6
"But my horn shalt thou exalt like the horn of the unicorn: I shall be anointed with fresh oil."—Psalms 92:10
"And the unicorns shall come down with them, and the bullocks with their bulls; and their land shall be soaked with blood, and their dust made fat with fatness."—Isaiah 34:7

Now, as we know you can prove the accuracy of the Bible - please enlighten us. At what point did the unicorn go from being biblically real to mythological?

[bennyboy]

Because a god does not exist.
See above response.

Your response is too vague. You would not like to elaborate on that? I mean you are already accepting the fact that there is a higher power, by this you are acknowledging that there IS a God. Why do you choose not to believe in Him?

Apologies if anything interesting has happened since page 1. I couldn't get past this comment.

How do you interpret "Because a god does not exist" to "You are acknowledging that there IS a God"? Are you fucktarded, or am I missing something?

[Cinjin]

How do you interpret "Because a god does not exist" to "You are acknowledging that there IS a God"? Are you fucktarded, or am I missing something?

Nope ... you're not missing anything Bennyboy. Spot on.

[pocaracas]

Madam, I never lie!

Mademoiselle, s'il vous plaît! :p

Excusez moi, but I was using the english version, Ma'am.

[max-greece]

Your response is too vague. You would not like to elaborate on that? I mean you are already accepting the fact that there is a higher power, by this you are acknowledging that there IS a God. Why do you choose not to believe in Him?

Apologies if anything interesting has happened since page 1. I couldn't get past this comment.

How do you interpret "Because a god does not exist" to "You are acknowledging that there IS a God"? Are you fucktarded, or am I missing something?

He's using the ontological argument. Basically as soon as you consider God he exists.

Amongst the many flaws in the argument is the idea that his God and a perfect entity have anything in common.

The perfect entity, by definition, is actually not God. The perfect entity doesn't suffer from vanity, pride, wroth or jealousy.

Plus the perfect entity obviously has large breasts as I have argued before.

[Mister Agenda]

I'm guessing that you do not have the fullest capacity in your mindset to understand the simplicity of my question. IF you are an atheist, WHY?

Why not?

Is there some specific reason as to why you choose to NOT believe in a God, you already acknowledge the fact that there IS a God, now why is there a denial?

I don't believe in things of which I haven't been convinced. I don't believe in Bigfoot, either. I didn't decide not to believe in Bigfoot, but the evidence for Bigfoot is weak and since a huge primate living in North America without anyone being able to bring in solid evidence is implausible, it will take more than what I've heard so far to convince me. I don't see how me not believing in Bigfoot means I acknowledge the existence of Bigfoot, and I don't see how not believing in God means I acknowledge the existence of God. It's not God I deny, it's that the arguments and evidence for God provide sufficient support to justify rational belief in God. If Bigfoot or God turn out to exist, I'll be happy (though somewhat surprised) to accept that.