Where do athiests think we came from?

[Rlyeh]

What is being pointed out to you is that your assumptions are flawed.

All you've shown is you can make unfalsifiable arguments, such philosophical m********ion yields nothing of substance.

What is claimed as evidence in the above replies is not evidence at all. In the same way that my yard being covered in concrete is not evidence that grass doesnt exist your arguments are not proof that theres no God.

Even your analogies are asinine.

Evidence shows the Biblical god didn't do what the authors credited him with, or gave fictional scenarios.

Edited December 7, 2012 by Rlyeh

[Mr Right Wing]

1. Then this doesn't really help your side of the discussion does it?

2. There is an overwhelming lack of rationale and logic behind the possibility of His existence

3. Could you elaborate on this non-dualism, because this is a dualistic universe and we ALL exist in this universe . . . probably even you! 4. Also, please show me any of this "evidence" you keep talking about?

5. I think not . . . on both accounts.

1. Except for the first comment that shows it does. Nice how you left that out.

2. Please, I could invent 101 distortions about you but that doesnt count as overwhelming evidence. It doesnt count as any evidence.

3. Neither science nor philosophy asserts the universe is dualistic.

4. Non-dualism is proven in Quantum Mechanics. Its called the wavefunction.

5. When a blind man wants to believe he has two legs he wont listen to anyone tell him any different.

[Mr Right Wing]

All you've shown is you can make unfalsifiable arguments, such philosophical m********ion yields nothing of substance.

Even your analogies are asinine.

Evidence shows the Biblical god didn't do what the authors credited him with, or gave fictional scenarios.

You do know that in one of the books in the Bible they tell you how reality works. Would you like me to tell you about it?

[Mac E]

This is where my signature after my posts comes in handy.

[Etu Malku]

1. Except for the first comment that shows it does. Nice how you left that out.

2. Please, I could invent 101 distortions about you but that doesnt count as overwhelming evidence. It doesnt count as any evidence.

3. Neither science nor philosophy asserts the universe is dualistic.

4. Non-dualism is proven in Quantum Mechanics. Its called the wavefunction.

5. When a blind man wants to believe he has two legs he wont listen to anyone tell him any different.

Oy Vey

Your numbering system leaves much to be desired as it isn't synced up with the original questions & answers . . . but I'll take it from here.

What are you talking about with the 101 distortions not counting as evidence?

I am simply stating that you cannot prove something does not exist because you cannot prove a negative. If god existed then it would be possible to prove He does. If he doesn't it is impossible to prove that. Understand?

Philosophy certainly does assert we are in a dualistic universe, and much of science as well. Everything has it's "anti" so to speak.

Some religious philosophy explains us coming from a Monad (non-duality) and upon reflecting upon the Self a descent into dualism and eventual material form is set into motion.

THe Hermetic axiom "As Above, So Below" has been a staple in most religious philosophy for centuries and describes our dualistic existence.

"The blind see what they want to see" Dan Brown, The Da Vinci Code

[Beckys_Mom]

You ask me to Over-explain therefore I'm not interested cause this discussion is boring enough with you

I only asked you to explain why you thought science and man has not progressed throughout history? You fail to explain.

predictability & lack of understanding.

You're right, I lack understanding, because your statement lacks logic and reasoning as to why you would post up something that doesn't make sense.. It begs the question of WHY? You posted it to me directly, its no wonder I felt you may know what you are talking about.. A mistake on my behalf as it seems

If you were to post a thread and in the OP you post -> Mankind has not progressed throughout history and science is limited and cannot go far.. People will ask you the same as myself - Why do you think so ? It's a fair question to ask .... Bottom line is, you shouldn't try and discuss things you are unsure of..I am sorry but it is pointless when you cannot back anything up with a half decent reply

Edited December 7, 2012 by Beckys_Mom

[C235]

I only asked you to explain why you thought science and man has not progressed throughout history? You fail to explain.

You're right, I lack understanding, because your statement lacks logic and reasoning as to why you would post up something that doesn't make sense.. It begs the question of WHY? You posted it to me directly, its no wonder I felt you may know what you are talking about.. A mistake on my behalf as it seems

If you were to post a thread and in the OP you post -> Mankind has not progressed throughout history and science is limited and cannot go far.. People will ask you the same as myself - Why do you think so ? It's a fair question to ask .... Bottom line is, you shouldn't try and discuss things you are unsure of..I am sorry but it is pointless when you cannot back anything up with a half decent reply

) What you are doing to my Posts isn't appropriate "Mankind has not progressed throughout history" & "science is limited and cannot go far" you got to be kidding me! You are quite skilled I give you that but that doesn't change anything, still predictable

Edited December 7, 2012 by C235

[Rlyeh]

You do know that in one of the books in the Bible they tell you how reality works. Would you like me to tell you about it?

Did you know in one of the books God talks about men with donkey penises?

[Mr Right Wing]

This is where my signature after my posts comes in handy.

Thats what non-duality means too.

[Mr Right Wing]

1. What are you talking about with the 101 distortions not counting as evidence?

2. I am simply stating that you cannot prove something does not exist because you cannot prove a negative. If god existed then it would be possible to prove He does. If he doesn't it is impossible to prove that.

3. Philosophy certainly does assert we are in a dualistic universe, and much of science as well. Everything has it's "anti" so to speak.

4. Some religious philosophy explains us coming from a Monad (non-duality) and upon reflecting upon the Self a descent into dualism and eventual material form is set into motion.

5. The Hermetic axiom "As Above, So Below" has been a staple in most religious philosophy for centuries and describes our dualistic existence.

6. "The blind see what they want to see" Dan Brown, The Da Vinci Code

1. Your negativity towards religion which is just negativity.

2. Precisely and not having evidence now doesnt mean we will never have evidence does it?

3. Dualism has nothing to do with ordinary and anti-matter. Dualism means matter and mind exist as two seperate things. In physics it refers to particle and wave behaviours.

4. Non-dualism is everything being one and that oneness is their concept of God. The illusion of duality results from this due to awareness.

5. Its a shame you dont know what it means.

6. As shown previously it fits you 100%.

[Mr Right Wing]

Did you know in one of the books God talks about men with donkey penises?

Side stepping then?

Edited December 7, 2012 by Mr Right Wing

[Etu Malku]

1. Your negativity towards religion which is just negativity.

Actually negative & positive are subjective. You perception of my so-called religious negativity has been the praise of many an email in my time, all thanking me for clearing their misconceptions and delusions.

Again . . . "The blind only see what they want to see"

2. Precisely and not having evidence now doesnt mean we will never have evidence does it?

Agnostically speaking, you are correct.

3. Dualism has nothing to do with ordinary and anti-matter. Dualism means matter and mind exist as two seperate things. In physics it refers to particle and wave behaviours.

Dualism (from the Latin word duo meaning "two") denotes a state of two parts. The term 'dualism' was originally coined to denote co-eternal binary opposition, a meaning that is preserved in metaphysical and philosophical duality discourse but has been diluted in general or common usages. Dualism can refer to moral dualism, (e.g. the conflict between good and evil), mind-body or mind-matter dualism (e.g. Cartesian Dualism) or physical dualism (e.g. the Chinese Yin and Yang). Dualism holds to the belief that there are two elements of existence: Physical and Spiritual.

4. Non-dualism is everything being one and that oneness is their concept of God. The illusion of duality results from this due to awareness.

Not everyone follows this Right Hand Path theology. Separating into "two" from the Monad is a very old religious mindset.

5. Its a shame you dont know what it means.

Then please enlighten me?

6. As shown previously it fits you 100%.

Cute Edited December 7, 2012 by Etu Malku

[Beckys_Mom]

What you are doing to my Posts isn't appropriate

I summed up what you have said... To break this down -->"Mankind has not progressed throughout history" & "science is limited and cannot go far" it goes a little like this below

History has shown no progress

I summed it up to - "Mankind has not progressed throughout history"

I wanted to know why you thought so ?

And to add..

In my theory science will stop not us! though in your theory you can go as far as you please.

I summed the above statement up to - "science is limited and cannot go far" Because that is what you are saying, well besides the fact you think science will stop !! I cannot understand why you feel science will stop lol That is a head scratcher, no wonder I asked you why you thought so ? Sorry, but when someone says science will stop, I think that alone is just funny

Seems to me I summed up what you did say perfectly well . I summed it up, not word for word, but I was still on the right track...

BUT it's ok, you do not have to explain them, I couldn't put you under that amount of complexed pressure.. What was I thinking asking why ? lol

[Mr Right Wing]

1. Not everyone follows this Right Hand Path theology. S

2. eparating into "two" from the Monad is a very old religious mindset.

3. Then please enlighten me?

4. Cute

1. I'm Western I dont know what the right hand path is.

2. The seperation into two is in physics.

3. The macrocosm mirrors the mircocosm.

4. You better be female or I'm outta here lol

[Beckys_Mom]

4. You better be female or I'm outta here lol

Ok that made me laugh.. Who'd thunk it, Mr Right Wing with a sense of humour lol

[Etu Malku]

1. I'm Western I dont know what the right hand path is.

2. The seperation into two is in physics.

3. The macrocosm mirrors the mircocosm.

4. You better be female or I'm outta here lol

1 What has being "Western" (like as ina cowboy?) have to do with not knowing what the RHP means? What you meant to say was "I'm ignorant, I don't know what the right hand path means"

2 Physics is what we use to help explain the objective universe, it is onlt half of what we are discussing here. Of course my understanding is that this god of yours is nothing but the personification of the objective universe.

3 It means a little more than that there Hermes Simplex

4 See ya

[Rlyeh]

Side stepping then?

The books contain many primitive concepts, having you parrot them isn't that appealing

[Mr Right Wing]

1 What has being "Western" (like as ina cowboy?) have to do with not knowing what the RHP means? What you meant to say was "I'm ignorant, I don't know what the right hand path means"

2 Physics is what we use to help explain the objective universe, it is onlt half of what we are discussing here. Of course my understanding is that this god of yours is nothing but the personification of the objective universe.

3 It means a little more than that there Hermes Simplex

4 See ya

1. It means you need to talk in Greek philosophy terms to me because I'm Western not Eastern.

2. Reality isnt objective its subjective.

3. Subjective reality and the mind are the same thing.

4. My back is firmly against the wall lol.

[Mr Right Wing]

The books contain many primitive concepts, having you parrot them isn't that appealing

Gotcha!

I talk rubbish about the Bible telling you how reality works in one if its chapters. You comeback with the above reply showing us you dont know the contents of the Bible.

So despite admitting (by mistake) that you dont know whats in the Bible you insist on telling us it contains rubbish. Another example of your flawed logic.

All you come out with is a collection of personal assumptions haha

[C235]

I summed up what you have said... To break this down -->"Mankind has not progressed throughout history" & "science is limited and cannot go far" it goes a little like this below

I summed it up to - "Mankind has not progressed throughout history"

I wanted to know why you thought so ?

And to add..

I summed the above statement up to - "science is limited and cannot go far" Because that is what you are saying, well besides the fact you think science will stop !! I cannot understand why you feel science will stop lol That is a head scratcher, no wonder I asked you why you thought so ? Sorry, but when someone says science will stop, I think that alone is just funny

Seems to me I summed up what you did say perfectly well . I summed it up, not word for word, but I was still on the right track...

BUT it's ok, you do not have to explain them, I couldn't put you under that amount of complexed pressure.. What was I thinking asking why ? lol

You are butchering my statements "History(mankind/science) has shown no progress in the field of supernature" & of course Science reaches its limits where When creation meets Its Creator (God).

Your sum is lesser than the variables, Seems like you can't process complex statements so you attempt to simplify them therefore you astray from the right track

It is only complex to you. I think your brain is getting tired, give it some rest.

Edited December 7, 2012 by C235

[Rlyeh]

Gotcha!

I talk rubbish about the Bible telling you how reality works in one if its chapters. You comeback with the above reply showing us you dont know the contents of the Bible.

Actually my reply does show I know what is in the Bible. The Bible does suggest how reality works but the concept of God and spirits working behind the scenes is as laughable as your egocentric world view.

Try using your brain next time.

So despite admitting (by mistake) that you dont know whats in the Bible you insist on telling us it contains rubbish. Another example of your flawed logic.

Making ignorant accusations won't get you anywhere.

All you come out with is a collection of personal assumptions haha

Not once have you supported your statements with anything more than opinions.

"Reality is subjective, reality and the mind are the same thing.". Juvenile reasoning.

Edited December 7, 2012 by Rlyeh

[Mr Right Wing]

Not once have you supported your statements with anything more than opinions.

"Reality is subjective, reality and the mind are the same thing.". Juvenile reasoning.

Funny I thought sensory perception formed a huge part of philosophy.

But then again you do have a selective memory.

[Arbenol]

7. I won the debate pages back but woooosh, its over your head.

You posted this over three hours ago. And you're still arguing 3 pages later.

If you don't even believe yourself, how can you expect anyone else to.

[Rlyeh]

Funny I thought sensory perception formed a huge part of philosophy.

And?

Members of the flat earth society uses the same sensory perception. This would be quite a problem for one who equates reality with perception.

[Mr Right Wing]

You posted this over three hours ago. And you're still arguing 3 pages later.

If you don't even believe yourself, how can you expect anyone else to.

Constructing another straw man argument are we?

I caught you out last time you did that and you looked like a fool lol.