Does God exist? (William Lane Craig vs Peter Atkins debate) (11 Viewers)

[Raz]

No. Rather, those whom have eyes see the visible, and those whom have ears hear the audible. God is neither of those.

What % of the whole spectre do you think our eyes can see? The same question about the audible.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Sheik Yerbouti]

No you just fail to listen because as open as you say you are that's how closed you really are. You have your mind made up with an answer before you ask the question

Does god really give up so easily in trying to talk to me?

 

[Raz]

So god certainly failed to talk to me through you. I hope he tries better the next time.

Kind of ignorant statement to make, for an open kind of guy.

It's like you say you search for god by trying to udnerstand and question other religions. But it's like you going around the world to meet some guru and even before hearing him you have your mind how things should work, and anything he says would be non-sense because of it. Yeah, it seems really open.

 

[AndreaCristiano]

Does god really give up so easily in trying to talk to me?

No but if your ears aren't truly hearing and eyes seeing because they have been shut off how can he reach you ? Its a two way street free will if you do not want to hear he will not force himself

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

What % of the whole spectre do you think our eyes can see? The same question about the audible.

You can just Google that stuff. What's your point?

 

[Martin]

You all still discount believers and their personal experience. Your like alcoholics who look at a recovering alcoholic in AA and discount his experience because you can't reach that experience.

Your analogy is interesting, but perplexing. It's more like listening to someone who takes drugs and then tell you everything they've seen while they were delirious.

 

[Trequartista]

When is this thread getting nuked?

It has been long overdue.

 

[Martin]

When is this thread getting nuked?

It has been long overdue.

You must suffer immensely to keep coming here to ask the same question.

 

[AndreaCristiano]

Your analogy is interesting, but perplexing. It's more like listening to someone who takes drugs and then tell you everything they've seen while they were delirious.

You want to use drugs. Two addicts one who reaches a plateau of cleanliness through a personal experience the other who can not comprehend how that person got clean because they can not we past the addiction. No matter how hard the clean junkie tries to relay his personal experience the addict can not comprehend the transformation unless he experiences it himself. So until that moment the addict will constantly believe that getting clean is an impossibility even if he sees another who has experienced that

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Kind of ignorant statement to make, for an open kind of guy.

It's like you say you search for god by trying to udnerstand and question other religions. But it's like you going around the world to meet some guru and even before hearing him you have your mind how things should work, and anything he says would be non-sense because of it. Yeah, it seems really open.

Incorrect.

No but if your ears aren't truly hearing and eyes seeing because they have been shut off how can he reach you ? Its a two way street free will if you do not want to hear he will not force himself

Yes, it's a 2-way street. I've asked many times, especially when I was younger and without any doubt in god, to speak to me. Sadly, I heard nothing. But yes, go ahead and blame ME for gods' reluctance to communicate with me.

 

[Trequartista]

You must suffer immensely to keep coming here to ask the same question.

Reading exchanges between AC and Sheik on religion is worse than watching Ligue 1.

But then I could just not read them, I guess.

 

[Raz]

When is this thread getting nuked?

It has been long overdue.

Make love not war.

 

[AndreaCristiano]

Kind of ignorant statement to make, for an open kind of guy.

It's like you say you search for god by trying to udnerstand and question other religions. But it's like you going around the world to meet some guru and even before hearing him you have your mind how things should work, and anything he says would be non-sense because of it. Yeah, it seems really open.

Pretty much nails it when it comes to sheik

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Reading exchanges between AC and Sheik on religion is worse than watching Ligue 1.

But then I could just not read them, I guess.

Then don't read them!!! Is this really so hard to do?

 

[Martin]

You want to use drugs. Two addicts one who reaches a plateau of cleanliness through a personal experience the other who can not comprehend how that person got clean because they can not we past the addiction. No matter how hard the clean junkie tries to relay his personal experience the addict can not comprehend the transformation unless he experiences it himself. So until that moment the addict will constantly believe that getting clean is an impossibility even if he sees another who has experienced that

No, you're not getting it. You keep saying that we are discarding your personal experience as proof of god. That's exactly like discarding the personal experience of someone hallucinating. It can't be independently verified, so it's discarded.

 

[Raz]

Incorrect.

That was just an observation.

 

[Martin]

Reading exchanges between AC and Sheik on religion is worse than watching Ligue 1.

But then I could just not read them, I guess.

Well you're the one watching Ligue 1, not us.

 

[AndreaCristiano]

Reading exchanges between AC and Sheik on religion is worse than watching Ligue 1.

But then I could just not read them, I guess.

You don't like it stay out of the thread if not shut up and join in

 

[Trequartista]

Then don't read them!!! Is this really so hard to do?

I must be insane, I'm repeating the same thing over and over again expecting different results.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

That was just an observation.

Still incorrect.