Atheists... Your life is pointless

Re: Frank Apisa (Post 5204935)
Quote:
As for me...I cannot compute the probabilities...and I do not see enough evidence up0n which to make a meaningful estimate.


I could be wrong in my thinking but I think I may be correct and I will try and state my view point even though it may be wrong.

If we were to say that something could come into existence by chance what would the likelihood be that this thing could also create other things?

Would it be more likely that it just came into being or would it be more likely it just came into being and was also able to create other beings?

.I can possibly have shown you that I have OCPD...

Keep in mind that I also think it possible that "nothing has ever come into existence"...that everything has always existed and just reforms occasionally or continually.

Actually, I think it is more likely that it (whatever you mean by "it") never ever "came into existence" but rather always has been in existence....that there never ever has ever been "nothing."

I think I probably favor "the GOD would then cause other things to come into existence.

Re: Frank Apisa (Post 5204997)
Quote:
Keep in mind that I also think it possible that "nothing has ever come into existence"...that everything has always existed and just reforms occasionally or continually.


Yes this is how I see it as well.

I think what we call nothing is actually something. It is like what air may have been to people 5,000 years ago.
Just as we see outer space as empty space, as if it is nothing they also thought the same about air but we know much more about air today than they did.

Quote:
Actually, I think it is more likely that it (whatever you mean by "it") never ever "came into existence" but rather always has been in existence....that there never ever has ever been "nothing."


This is how I see it as well.

Quote:

Quote:
I think I probably favor "the GOD would then cause other things to come into existence.

Why? is it because you are old and your days are numbered? I don't think this is the case with you because I think you have an interest in intellectual honesty even if a God may not.

If you favor a God that is cool but what do you think would be a simpler form of logic? A god just happening by chance and then creating everything Or just every thing coming about in a chaotic mess?

(Don't treat this too seriously, RL. I am just dealing with your hypothetical.)

I do agree do you?

I hear what you are saying, RL...and I note that SM suggests the exact opposite in the next post.

infinite and eternal

you could double the chances against

almost a sure thing

Nevermind that...I am going to keep posting it, till you answer me...

Re: Frank Apisa (Post 5205028)
Quote:
(Don't treat this too seriously, RL. I am just dealing with your hypothetical.)


I wont Frank even if you share a different point of view than I do, I still respect you as a person.

What do you think is more logical?

What do you think would be a simpler form of logic? A god just happening by chance and then creating everything Or just everything coming about in a chaotic mess?

Re: Frank Apisa (Post 5204935)
Quote:
I hear what you are saying, RL...and I note that SM suggests the exact opposite in the next post.
Nevermind that...I am going to keep posting it, till you answer me...

And show me you do not have a lack of comprehension yourself, like you go around and claim that I do...

What about my riddle answer was so hilarious that you and other people could get a "good laugh" out of it?

You did say that it was hilarious? Others could get a "good laugh"? And I lack comprehension?

Is lack of comprehension a hilarious issue to you?

Re: Frank Apisa (Post 5204937)
Quote:
infinite and eternal

you could double the chances against

almost a sure thing


Can you explain this too me please...?

Re: Frank Apisa (Post 5204935)
If it is a trillion times more unlikely and no credible scientist would back 1^123...Then there is something seriously wrong with atheists embracing science...When scientist do not even use science to do what atheists do...

This post would suggest that I DID in fact understand it...

Is this correct or incorrect?

Re: reasoning logic (Post 5205227)
Not at all...Because I think Frank is going to keep saying it...So I would like him to answer my questions...

However, If you can prove to me that Frank is not going to make that claim and not substantiate it...anymore

Then I will drop it...

I honestly do not think either is "more logical."

I cannot comprehend how you can assign probability to the logic involved in any of the possible scenarios.