You have provided no objective basis (true irrespective of individual belief) whatsoever. Even child rape cannot be objectively wrong if non theism is true. If we are just chemical animals, chemicals causally determine everything. There is no free-will or choice. Why is a child rapist wrong if he has no choice? Why is one chemical illusion of morality the 'right' illusion? Why does your chemical illusion constitute a moral duty upon another chemical animal who has a different illusion of raping children as 'good' for him?teh teh teh do not panic mdau..
You are creating a God to fit the arguments against him, this is moving the goal posts. You cant demonstrate that the universe began to exist, so asserting that it needs an intelligent being to kick it off is not a valid argument. The argument who created God is only invalid if you define him as first cause, you cant define the God for someone else's question, only for your own. So your question is nonsensical.
It has not been demonstrated that the universe has a beginning, only the time probably had a beginning. You're simply asserting it. We have no examples of anything other than the universe so we can only theorise things outside of it, not demonstrate them.
The concept of an eternal universe is far more likely than an eternal being. Because we have no evidence that an eternal being could exist.
All of your arguments are based on assertions not logic. Then you build complex arguments on top of these assertions in the hope that no one will notice.
Can non theists defend their belief position that No God exists - or is non theism a mindless belief held without evidence or arguments?
I have never heard an non theist offer arguments or evidence to justify their non theist belief position. I've heard hundreds of temper tantrums, lies, dodging questions, 'sky fairy' straw men, really lame excuses for why non theism has no intellectual burden....but never any intellectual justification. Normally, when I finish exposing the non theist, he /she blocks me to stop the humiliation.
What arguments and evidence do non theists offer to justify their belief?
There is no "INSULT" in science.
Then why do clowns you lose every point of every debate?
You can't engage, much less refute, my arguments and evidences.
I refute everything of substance you throw at me.
You cannot defend against my refutations.
You cannot answer my questions.
You deny any burden to justify non theism. I justify Theism in evidence and reason.
You guys are really quite pathetic. Non theism is mindless.
You are delusional.
Perhaps you are afflicted with schizophrenia because delusional thinking is very common in that illness.
Jibu hoja wewe, is there insults in science ?
teh teh teh DO NOT PANIC mdau..
You are creating a God to fit the arguments against him, this is moving the goal posts. You cant demonstrate that the universe began to exist, so asserting that it needs an intelligent being to kick it off is not a valid argument. The argument who created God is only invalid if you define him as first cause, you cant define the God for someone else's question, only for your own. So your question is nonsensical.
It has not been demonstrated that the universe has a beginning, only the time probably had a beginning. You're simply asserting it. We have no examples of anything other than the universe so we can only theorise things outside of it, not demonstrate them.
The concept of an eternal universe is far more likely than an eternal being. Because we have no evidence that an eternal being could exist.
All of your arguments are based on assertions not logic. Then you build complex arguments on top of these assertions in the hope that no one will notice.
Hata kuunda sentensi nyepesi kunakushinda?
Hebu nenda kachukue kozi ya Kiingereza wewe.
You are delusional.
Perhaps you are afflicted with schizophrenia because delusional thinking is very common in that illness.
Hata kuunda sentensi nyepesi kunakushinda?
Hebu nenda kachukue kozi ya Kiingereza wewe.
All those hostilities and you cannot provide a single example where I am wrong.
I refuted all of your non theist hogwash. You lack the intellectual honesty to admit correction and you are too lazy and dishonest to engage and think. .
mpinga shetani;You are so dumb. Like I said many so called god believers, including yourself does it through religion and you know it.
Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither
cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample
them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.
In other words NEVER MOTIVATE an IDIOT,if you motivate an IDIOT YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE A MOTIVATED IDIOT.
Sasa DINI na MUNGU wapi na Wapi?
Many so called god believers inherited their mindless religions from their parents who were fed the garbage by slave totting Arabs or territory annexing missionaries.
Where is the evidence that god really exists?
I've asked that question each time he comes with those plain explanations as evidence for god's existence but all I get is nothing.
I have answered you
Fact: You have utterly failed to answer any of my questions or refute my arguments.
Go find a pacifier to suck...Now, go back in your mothers basement kid and play with toys.
Dini ni box kubwa lisilo na mlango wala dirisha. Sasa sijui nani anaishi kwenye box hapa
Obviously we both know you are lying. Your lies are even more naked and egregious as the written record reveals I have answered you with a full and valid refutation.
1) The arguments are evidences for God.
2) I regularly offer massive evidence to justify Theistic belief (see below). You cannot refute my evidence nor can you offer any justification for your non theistic belief.
Here is my evidence for God's likely existence.
Where is your evidence God does not exist?
Contingency – Why does something exist rather than nothing? Something cannot come from nothing, so Something must self-exist. Self-existence is necessary. Universe began. Universe is not self-existent. Universe requires a causally antecedent agency to explain it's existence. God does not – no beginning.
Cosmological – Absolute beginning requires a cause. Cause of Physical Universe cannot be Physical. Must be non-physical, space-less, timeless and willful to cause Physical Universe from Physical Nothingness.
Design: specified complexity, specifically integrated interdependencies for third purposes, irreducible complexity. No plausible Naturalistic mechanisms or explanations actually exist.
Precision FINELY TUNED constants and quantities present in initial conditions of the Universe to within infinitesimally narrow ranges to permit life. Universe is precision balanced on razor's edge.
Ontological argument – God is a metaphysically necessary Being. Since God's attributes are metaphysically possible, and all metaphysical possibilities are also actual, God must be actual.
Intelligence in Nature: Intelligence, order and reason and information all from Nothingness?
Spiritual instinct of man: Evolved to connect with something not actual?
Free-will: Chemical causation is not free-will. Agency requires a soul. Chemicals have no moral duties
Moral Truth / Apprehension of Objective moral truth. Is rape really wrong or just an illusion? Is rape just a natural chemical byproduct caused by electrochemical activity (non theism) – or an act of will.
Massive Historical evidences of witnessed Miracles, visions, fulfilled prophecies,
Personal experiences: Ubiquitous NDE's, supernatural phenomena
Christ's resurrection witnessed by hundreds.
Absolute failure of Naturalism to explain a Finely tuned Universe, Finite Universe, Sentience, Rational truth and natural order, Moral Law (morality), intuition, intentionality, intelligence, purpose, free-will…