There is no evidence/proof you'll vanish into non-existence

BidenPresident said:
You believe that. I never heard of someone making that argument.
Click to expand...

The argument, "Yes. In order for God to make a contact with a human being, it has to be in a physical form."...makes no sense.

I am not sure why he/she is making it. Seems like a stalling effort of some kind.
 
Frank Apisa said:
If there is a god...I do not consider that god to be a supernatural being. Anything that exists is a part of nature...whether we humans can detect it in any way.
Click to expand...

If we meet a god, we detect it already.

Before I proceed further, please explain your position and what is your problem with my position? I am an atheist who lacks any belief in any deity.
 
Frank Apisa said:
The argument, "Yes. In order for God to make a contact with a human being, it has to be in a physical form."...makes no sense.

I am not sure why he/she is making it. Seems like a stalling effort of some kind.
Click to expand...

Because how else will a human being see, touch, smell, hear and taste the being?
 
BidenPresident said:
I believe you are not very articulate and waste a lot of time with inane babbling.
Click to expand...

I thought the burning bush part was articulate. The burning bush is obviously physical way to communicate to Moses. Unless you want to make a case that it was in Moses' feverish imagination.
 
AProudLefty said:
I thought the burning bush part was articulate. The burning bush is obviously physical way to communicate to Moses. Unless you want to make a case that it was in Moses' feverish imagination.
Click to expand...

I really don't care about Bible stories. Clearly you cannot debate this issue rationally.
 
BidenPresident said:
I really don't care about Bible stories. Clearly you cannot debate this issue rationally.
Click to expand...

I have stated that I use the Bible stories as examples (even if they're not real) to illustrate my point.

Question to you - How will a non-physical being contact a physical being?
 
I've asked theists if their belief in God was important to them.

Not all but most say yes.

Then I would ask them if they believed any other very important thing on the same quality of evidence.

That's when I get the bullshit that faith doesn't require evidence.

At that point, I know the conversation will not be held within the confines of logic.

That's why I just unilaterally accept that religion is superstition and likely harmful,
all the while knowing that 'm not going to get any truly intelligent help in trying to understand it.

On another thread, it was suggested that perhaps the human intellect and senses are insufficient to recognize all that is true.

Since human intellect and senses are all that we have with which to work,
what's the point of contemplating it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top