Creation or Evoloution? Big Bang or Big Belief -- which is it?

[KL-666]

Wait a minute, proponents of what you believe in are smarter than me, proponents of what you do not believe in are less smart? I do not think that works that way. Either they are all smarter, or not.

Anyway, i think we are and will be only repeating ourselves. I do not take any belief, also not if it comes from science. And you do, hoping that one day it will be proven. No endless discussion of ours is going to change that.

Kine regards, Vincent

[Lydiot]

Anyway, i think we are and will be only repeating ourselves. I do not take any belief, also not if it comes from science. And you do, hoping that one day it will be proven.

I like how you put words in my mouth. I think you're right that we're not getting anywhere if that's what you're going to do.

[KL-666]

I can only refer you tor your own post
https://thejabberwocky-net.brendtandbrendt.com/~brendta1/thejabberwocky/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=165&start=100&sid=45deedcd7074b9a07e9c781db66c6305&sid=45deedcd7074b9a07e9c781db66c6305#p2986,
before you accuse me of laying words in your mouth.

Kind regards, Vincent

[jwocky]

I don't see you coming to a consensus ever. Which was logically because if you go back and ask what everything is in its very nature (that was very freely Marcus Aurelius) you have a problem, that is based on the impossibility to prove God's existence but also the impossibility to prove his non-existence. So in fact, we can't prove either and that puts believers as much as non-believers in the place, they believe. They don't know. Nobody knows or can possibly know. So while I will not ban, delete or anything, I think, this leads just nowhere and it has in the meantime taken on that touch of "zealotry" that always comes with belief-problems. So maybe it is time, just to step a little back from the whole thing. By all means, whether God exists or not, we can pretty surely assume, he will not land my plane in FG with the next ILS failure I encounter.

[Lydiot]

I can only refer you tor your own post
https://thejabberwocky-net.brendtandbrendt.com/~brendta1/thejabberwocky/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=165&start=100&sid=45deedcd7074b9a07e9c781db66c6305&sid=45deedcd7074b9a07e9c781db66c6305#p2986,
before you accuse me of laying words in your mouth.

Kind regards, Vincent

And I wrote: "I'm inclined to listen to their actual arguments"

Or were you thinking of something else I said?

Because the above in no way shape or form amounts to "I do not take any belief, also not if it comes from science. And you do"

[KL-666]

Well fine, then we think the same. The more reason not to continue discussing about it.

Kind regards, Vincent

[Lydiot]

I don't see you coming to a consensus ever. Which was logically because if you go back and ask what everything is in its very nature (that was very freely Marcus Aurelius) you have a problem, that is based on the impossibility to prove God's existence but also the impossibility to prove his non-existence.

Indeed what I said earlier: God is unfalsifiable.

So in fact, we can't prove either and that puts believers as much as non-believers in the place, they believe.

But that's just nonsense. A non-believer believes? I mean, when people make statements like that they just destroy language. Words lose their meaning completely. If non-belief is belief we might as well say that "war is peace".

Believers in god propose that god exists. I don't adopt their proposition. That in itself is not a belief. It's a non-belief.

Google "gods" and go through the list of all gods humans have believed in throughout history. All us Atheists AND all Muslims, Jews and Christians are atheists in regards to ALL of those listed gods - except for the Abrahamic god. So the point is that my non-belief in the Abrahamic god is just as simple as any Christian's non-belief in any given African god, south-American god or Asian god that they've never heard of. They don't have that belief because they don't know it exists.

Not believing something does not equal believing something. It's just that simple.

They don't know. Nobody knows or can possibly know. So while I will not ban, delete or anything, I think, this leads just nowhere and it has in the meantime taken on that touch of "zealotry" that always comes with belief-problems. So maybe it is time, just to step a little back from the whole thing. By all means, whether God exists or not, we can pretty surely assume, he will not land my plane in FG with the next ILS failure I encounter.

"zealotry" is a bit harsh is it not?

I mean, do we have a discussion or just proclamations? If it's the latter we could all just start blogs instead.

[Lydiot]

Well fine, then we think the same. The more reason not to continue discussing about it.

Kind regards, Vincent

Nice timing Vincent.

[jwocky]

Only because someone calls himself "non-believer" for firmly believing without any scientific proof, the entity he chose not to belief in doesn't exist, he doesn't really become a "non-believer", he just adorned himself with a label he hasn't earned because as a matter of fact he believes as any other religious person in the truth in of something, that can't be proven by any scientific matters (in his case the non-existence of an entity).

The common behaviour of all "believers" inclusive self-proclaimed "non-believers" in unproven matters or self-proclaimed but unproven "facts" are
- unprovoked verbal aggression (See Lydiot and his "that is nonsense" reply)
- the urge to "convince" all others of the failures of their ways, also known as "missioning the infidels" in some religions (see the many posts about "God doesn't exist")
- the stubborn insistence in the own tenements of belief and the complementing mockery based on the unproven claim to be the only group with a beleif system that knows it all and got if all right, opposite to all other belief systems (which are usually en details unknown to the believer/self-proclaimed non-believer).

Thus, from a mere behavioural angle, Atheism for example is as much a religion as any other. Atheists firmly believe in ther scientificly unprovable fact that there are no other entities with any form of expanded skill set. They try to mission, they go aggressive on anybody who doesn't announce himself as being an atheist (KL-666 fro example doesn't believe in God as I know from earlier talks with him and still, since he didn't loudly yell "I am an Atheist", Lydiot, who played the role of the regular half-militant Atheist attacked him). Thus, Lydiot delivered (as so many "Atheists" before him already did), the prove, that Atheism is in fact nothing but another new trendy religion.

Have a nice evening!

[Lydiot]

Only because someone calls himself "non-believer" for firmly believing without any scientific proof, the entity he chose not to belief in doesn't exist, he doesn't really become a "non-believer", he just adorned himself with a label he hasn't earned because as a matter of fact he believes as any other religious person in the truth in of something, that can't be proven by any scientific matters (in his case the non-existence of an entity).

The common behaviour of all "believers" inclusive self-proclaimed "non-believers" in unproven matters or self-proclaimed but unproven "facts" are
- unprovoked verbal aggression (See Lydiot and his "that is nonsense" reply)
- the urge to "convince" all others of the failures of their ways, also known as "missioning the infidels" in some religions (see the many posts about "God doesn't exist")
- the stubborn insistence in the own tenements of belief and the complementing mockery based on the unproven claim to be the only group with a beleif system that knows it all and got if all right, opposite to all other belief systems (which are usually en details unknown to the believer/self-proclaimed non-believer).

Thus, from a mere behavioural angle, Atheism for example is as much a religion as any other. Atheists firmly believe in ther scientificly unprovable fact that there are no other entities with any form of expanded skill set. They try to mission, they go aggressive on anybody who doesn't announce himself as being an atheist (KL-666 fro example doesn't believe in God as I know from earlier talks with him and still, since he didn't loudly yell "I am an Atheist", Lydiot, who played the role of the regular half-militant Atheist attacked him). Thus, Lydiot delivered (as so many "Atheists" before him already did), the prove, that Atheism is in fact nothing but another new trendy religion.

Have a nice evening!

That's a post filled with more stupidity than I've seen in a while here. How's that for "verbal aggression"? Is everyone here a sensitive little child or what the hell is this place? (and that after having accused people of being "zealots"!... how rich!)

You claim non-believers are believers and then start whining about being called on it for it being nonsensical - which it is, because it's a frickin' oxymoron. If you know you're right about what you said then just explain just how one can be both a believer and a non-believer simultaneously.