Argumentum ad lapidem - This is a fallacy that consists in dismissing a statement as absurd without giving proof of its absurdity.
Please make argument from:
1. The official definition of Atheism
2. The definition of God
3. The definition of Religion
You claim the value of "0"
Thus the contradiction from that claim is:
1. Energy can be destroyed.
2. Energy can be created.
3. Energy cannot be transferred.
How do you explain this contradiction?
The elements from the official definition of Atheism
atheism. n. disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.
1. Atheism is a disbelief in the existence of God or gods.
1. Natural Order
2. Nature's God
3. Accordingly you must have the "set of atheist's belief" to counter the...
If you don't know the Reality/Metaphysics, then you don't have the Knowledge/Epistemology... and everything you said has no Value/Axiology. It is nonsense and delusional.
So you cannot explain the contradiction?
I say it proves my point that you're living in the "Magical Fairies"... it is a dream (0) and not real (1). There is afterlife with the value of (1).
1. What is mind (consciousness)?
2. Can your senses be trusted?
3. Are your dreams real or lie?
4. If it lied to you in your dream, how can you be certain it is not lying to you in this reality?
Can you prove all these or living your life with magical fairies?
ELSE, what then gives you the...
You are. Read the first post on the definition of religion, definition of God, definition of Atheism, and how Richard Dawkins classify the Atheists. That is the argument, and which you cannot counter with valid authority other than your blind claims or opinions.
Argumentum ad lapidem (argument with a stone) is a logical fallacy that consists in dismissing a statement as absurd without giving proof of its absurdity.
Then prove your own existence, bring proof you are not atoms and not an empty space. What is mind (consciousness)? Can your senses be trusted? Are your dreams real or lie? If it lied to you in your dream, how can you certain it is not lying to you in this reality? Can you prove all these or...
Why does the principle of Universal Causation seem to be inconsistent with the notion of Free Will?
Many claims we are born naturally, but that is not true. We are all born religious and our free will is inconsistent with the Natural Order. From the Quran, that is the basis or the foundation...