Chrisianity, Islam, Judaism, and the rest, do not have or know truth about god and life.
They are all ignorant of real knowledge and truth of god, but they teach their nonsense to the little children, and thus the ignorance spreads, how sad it is.
I will debate any person, of any religion, and set them straight.
But their must be some rules
rule 1. you can not quote from any book
rule 2. if you beleive something, it doesn,t make it fact
rule 3. you must adhere to sensability
rule 4. you must respect logic and reason
rule 5. you must accept a higher power
rule 6. you must accept defeat, which is really not defeat but a new realization
I will start by saying god is not a male
Originally posted by vishvahetuWell, I can't follow Rule 3, since sensibility dictates that quoting from books is sometimes necessary.
Chrisianity, Islam, Judaism, and the rest, do not have or know truth about god and life.
They are all ignorant of real knowledge and truth of god, but they teach their nonsense to the little children, and thus the ignorance spreads, how sad it is.
I will debate any person, of any religion, and set them straight.
But their must be some rules
rule 1. ...[text shortened]... feat, which is really not defeat but a new realization
I will start by saying god is not a male
Rule 4 is out for much the same reason.
Rule 5 is out for atheists such as myself.
Rule 6 is accepted in light of my failure to follow the other rules 😕
You win....
Originally posted by vishvahetuI agree, god is not male.
Chrisianity, Islam, Judaism, and the rest, do not have or know truth about god and life.
They are all ignorant of real knowledge and truth of god, but they teach their nonsense to the little children, and thus the ignorance spreads, how sad it is.
I will debate any person, of any religion, and set them straight.
But their must be some rules
rule 1. ...[text shortened]... feat, which is really not defeat but a new realization
I will start by saying god is not a male
I am curious as to where you are going to draw your conclusions from.
Anyway , I would give it a shot, but it seems that we already agree, and i would probaly readily submit to my defeat and new realization.
Still, any christian theists out there willing to give vishvahetu a go?
thats the problem with the main line religions, they have all their conclusions about god, and have put him/she/it, in a neat little box, and they call that a poket god, how silly they all are.
You can never come to any conclusions about god, because what would be your referance point? huh
Its enough to know, that god is on the job, keeping the planets spinning in their orbit, and not allowing the sun to burn out.
As for our mundane lives, god is not interested. cheers vishvahetu
Originally posted by vishvahetuAnd how did you come by these conclusions about god?
thats the problem with the main line religions, they have all their conclusions about god, and have put him/she/it, in a neat little box, and they call that a poket god, how silly they all are.
You can never come to any conclusions about god, because what would be your referance point? huh
Its enough to know, that god is on the job, keeping the planets ...[text shortened]... owing the sun to burn out.
As for our mundane lives, god is not interested. cheers vishvahetu
you are not an atheist in the pure sense, you can understand that there is a power causing the planets to spin in their orbits, and that power has desighned the human machine with all its senses.
Your claim to atheism is directed to all the nonsense religions that we have to endure on planet earth, and i am an atheist as well when talking about those nonsense religions! the god i beleive in, has nothing to do with them........ cheers visvahetu
Originally posted by vishvahetuI am an atheist in relation to your god as well. But you have not answered my question. You claim that other people are wrong about god because they cannot know him (it), but then you go on to give us some very specific information about this alleged god. How can your conclusions about god be deemed any more trustworthy than anyone else's? The logical position (it would seem) would be to doubt all non-contradictory claims about god equally.
you are not an atheist in the pure sense, you can understand that there is a power causing the planets to spin in their orbits, and that power has desighned the human machine with all its senses.
Your claim to atheism is directed to all the nonsense religions that we have to endure on planet earth, and i am an atheist as well when talking about those nonsense religions! the god i beleive in, has nothing to do with them........ cheers visvahetu
Originally posted by vishvahetuYou have concluded that:
i have not come to conclusions about god, ( thats what iam saying)
how can you come to a conclusion about something which is outside your scope of understanding.
One can only observe and appreciate within his/her own heart
A) god exists
B) that god keeps the planets spinning in their orbit
C) that god keeps the sun from burning out
D) and that god is not interested in our mundane lives
Edit: If god is outside of our scope of understanding then how can you claim to know any of these things?
Originally posted by vishvahetuI fail to see why intelligence should necessarily be assumed, even for a theist. A pantheist outlook could, for example, conceive of god as being non-sentient, and thus not having intelligence. Why is your conclusion that he is intelligent supposedly above reproach, while the conclusion that he died on the cross is not?
Mr rwingett
yes, some obvious conclusions are accepted, for example you can conclude that god is intelligent, but when people conclude that god died on a cross for us, have they checked that out with god first, or did they read it in a delusional book.