Originally posted by dj2beckerthis bible must be old. hath hath hath thou
John 4:24 - God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.
John 6:33 - For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.
Romans 1:18 - For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
...[text shortened]... e are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.
Originally posted by bbarrSo you have left the atheist with two possibilities. Either matter is its own uncaused cause (absurd) or there exists some other uncaused cause enacting agent (probability-wise more logical). The atheist chooses the absurd over the logical.
Haven't you heard? The atheist is committed to the claim that the universe came from nothing. From nothing! 😲
But, as everyone knows, nothing comes from nothing, because everything that exists has to have a cause!
Except God, He doesn't have to have a cause! Hooray for God!
[Refute at your leisure.]
Hooray for the atheist!
Originally posted by FreakyKBHOr the atheist says the universe was uncaused, and doesn't have a beginning.
So you have left the atheist with two possibilities. Either matter is its own uncaused cause (absurd) or there exists some other uncaused cause enacting agent (probability-wise more logical). The atheist chooses the absurd over the logical.
Hooray for the atheist!
Originally posted by StarrmanHere's an outline of historiography, courtesy of Wikipedia.
Lol, what? Perhaps you'd care to justify such a ludicrous claim.
EDIT: And are you going to post that list?
Some of the common questions of historiography are:
Who wrote the source (primary or secondary)?
For primary sources, we look at the person in his or her society, for secondary sources, we consider the theoretical orientation of the approach.
What is the authenticity, authority, bias/interest, and intelligibility of the source?
What was the view of history when the source was written?
Was history supposed to provide moral lessons?
What or who was the intended audience?
What sources were privileged or ignored in the narrative?
By what method was the evidence compiled?
In what historical context was the work of history itself written?
Issues engaged in so-called critical historiography includes topics such as:
What constitutes an historical "event"?
In what modes does a historian write and produce statements of "truth" and "fact"?
How does the medium (novel, textbook, film, theatre, comic) through which historical information is conveyed influence its meaning?
What inherent epistemological problems does archive-based history contain?
How does the historian establish their own objectivity or come to terms with their own subjectivity?
What is the relation of historical theory to historical practice?
What is the "goal" of history?
What is history?
Under this discipline, three principles emerge which can be used as the standard of ascertaining veracity.
1. Bibliographical test
2. Internal evidence test
3. External evidence test
Please inform me which of the above factors are arbitrary and should thus be removed.
Originally posted by FreakyKBH"Either matter is its own uncaused cause (absurd)"
So you have left the atheist with two possibilities. Either matter is its own uncaused cause (absurd) or there exists some other uncaused cause enacting agent (probability-wise more logical). The atheist chooses the absurd over the logical.
Hooray for the atheist!
hence god is absurd. as god doesn't have to have a cause to be, he is by your own logic "absurd".
Originally posted by StarrmanThe word ‘atheism’ comes from the negative ‘a’ which means ‘no’ and ‘theos’ which means ‘god.’ Hence, atheism in the most base terms means ‘no god.’ Basically, atheism is the lack of belief in a god and/or the belief that there is no god.
Atheism is not a state of belief.