dislike atheism

[Subduction Zone]

Or it could have always existed. The fact is that nobody knows for sure. Many of us would like to know, but that doesn't mean we actually know. You are just filling in that "I don't know" with a claim you feel is right.

And trying to claim that a god has always existed and needs no creator, but that the universe does need a creator is merely a special pleading error.

Not your error, but his:

Your logical fallacy is special pleading

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

His argument style reminds me of this web page:

How to "Win" Arguments and Infuriate Opponents (with examples!) by Louis Brandy

Almost seems like this could be something of a "crib sheet" for quite a few people I've encountered here on RF.

 

[Jesster]

you wrote this

Yes I did. What would you like to know?

 

[Subduction Zone]

that ''nothing'' is ethereal, it's god.

You combine an undefined term with an unsupported claim here.

 

[ChristineM]

atheists think they are the only intelligent beings in the universe. am i wrong?

Yes, as usual

 

[syo]

You combine an undefined term with an unsupported claim here.

undefined term??? it's Essence. Supreme Essence, what is undefined???

 

[syo]

Yes I did. What would you like to know?

what always existed?

 

[Subduction Zone]

undefined term??? it's Essence. Supreme Essence, what is undefined???

Essence is undefined.

it's Blixiation. Supreme Blixiation, what is undefined.

 

[syo]

Essence is undefined.

it's Blixiation. Supreme Blixiation, what is undefined.

come on now.... you thing mortal men can measure god's essence with machines?

 

[Jesster]

what always existed?

The universe? Possibly a multiverse? Everything?

That is one possibility anyway. I'm not making a claim here because I also don't know for sure. I am comfortable with saying "I don't know". I think you should try it.

 

[ChristineM]

This is another unsupported statement. Matter and energy does "appear from nothing" on a quantum level. That concept can be and has been tested.

Also you are using undefined terminology again. Physicists know that with the standard definition of "nothing" that the universe can come from nothing. This is an hour long video, but it goes over the reasoning and evidence used very well:

Here's some up to date work on the idea
[1404.1207] Spontaneous creation of the universe from nothing

 

[Subduction Zone]

come on now.... you thing mortal men can measure god's essence with machines?

A poorly formed question is not excuse for not defining a term. And you just admitted that you could not define the term that you used.

 

[ChristineM]

come on now.... you thing mortal men can measure god's essence with machines?

You think they can't? Why is that?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Here's some up to date work on the idea
[1404.1207] Spontaneous creation of the universe from nothing

Thanks, it is also much much more technical than Krauss's video. His video was aimed at the layman, this article is clearly not.

 

[ChristineM]

that ''nothing'' is ethereal, it's god.

Your evidence please?

 

[ChristineM]

Thanks, it is also much much more technical than Krauss's video. His video was aimed at the layman, this article is clearly not.

Correct.

It builds on Krauss by taking in new advances in quantum understanding

 

[syo]

A poorly formed question is not excuse for not defining a term. And you just admitted that you could not define the term that you used.

i can define the term. it's ethereal. but i don't know more because i am not a gnostic. i have a lot of research to do.

 

[Subduction Zone]

i can define the term. it's ethereal. but i don't know more because i am not a gnostic. i have a lot of research to do.

Sorry, but that is not a definition either. Now you are simply using another undefined term. This is circular reasoning on your part, another logical fallacy. You define "essence" with ethereal and "ethereal" with essence.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

One cannot deny that which does not exist. Starting out your post with a strawman only guarantees chaos at best.

I deny that there is a little green man made of straw living inside your skull making you say silly things.

 

[syo]

Sorry, but that is not a definition either. Now you are simply using another undefined term. This is circular reasoning on your part, another logical fallacy. You define "essence" with ethereal and "ethereal" with essence.

yes, i do that. let me explain the terms, give me a moment.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

My parents are not imaginary.

Even in the most banal materialism, your parents did not create you.
In this ideology you are a consequence of electromagnetic reactions between chemicals.
Your parents had no choice in the matter, they do not even exist more than as chemical
reactions between atoms. They and you are no more than animals mindlessly obeying
their genetic instincts to fornicate and breed as much as possible.

Unless you think there is more to life than that?