Don’t ask him question, he will keep telling I don’t know. Please just ask him to disprove my claims in a logical way. I don’t know is not an objection to any argument..
Zeeshan was close, the atheist was limiting the scope of the chat. Science is about inference and the atheist was okay making inferences until it became the universe.
@@Theo_Skeptomai eventually all Atheists come to a point " we don't know". Show me one Atheist that can give me the first necessary source for everything but they can't as they have none or give me a proof of something coming from nothing but again atheists can't because they have none! I think it's you who hasn't seen out of your box of Atheism and think everything is in that box 😂
His whole argument is that we don't know for sure what reality is ( or how it behaves ) outside of our known universe. Fine, but that position does NOT preclude God(swt) in any way. So given that his views lead to mountains of existential inadequacies ( no objective moral, no inherent meaning or reason, no inherent human value, no knowledge of the source etc.) that simply AREN'T there if he went with just about any other religious view.. why stick with Atheism in the first place?
@Theo_Skeptomai I am not. I am simply arguing that under the assumption that there are only two options ( either there is a theistic explanation to our reality or there is not ), you DO make an active choice when you say "I don't believe". Now, since his argument is that we can't draw conclusions about how our reality came to be, he can't logically use that as his basis for non-belief. He would have to look at other evidence. One set of evidence is that the theistic view has much greater explanatory power about existential issues than the atheistic view. So in his framework, I find it weird that he doesn't seem to be approaching the theistic view more openly ( simply dismissing everything with "I don't know").
@@Theo_Skeptomai Depends on what you mean by choosing in this context. You choose what evidence to look at and how to evaluate it. If you come at a problem with your mind already made up, you are likely to end up simply confirming what you already think you know. Whether true or not. It is not something atheists are immune to. Far, far from it.
@@Theo_Skeptomai You choose what evidence to look at and how to evaluate it. If you come at a problem with your mind made up, chances are you will not find objective truth, but simply confirm your own convictions, whether true or not.. It is not something Atheists are immune to or less prone to than their Theist counterparts. Far, far from it.
That kind of ‘I don’t know’ people, just tell them, I will make claims tell me if it is illogical.. thry will shut doen and ait it is more logical what you say..
@@Theo_Skeptomai I will only elaborate on one point - The shear fact he says "he is deluded by his own existence". To make everything erroneous including our own existence is us making out all these experiences as a source of self-duping which is nothing but being overtly sceptic, which is detrimental for any of our intellectual endeavors,, or conclusion based on inference [which he is an advocate of]. Basically, it is lying on a presumption that there is an arrayed abstract space specially available for him where his opinions and conclusions will remain uncontaminated by any previous authoritative influences or experiences. FALSE ASSUMPTION. He does not live his day to day life thinking that he is deluding the existence of traffic light when he cross the road, put his hand in fire thinking that his sense receptors are deluding him, starve himself thinking the food is a delusion, or his money, bank account, cell phone, is delusion when he purchase or contact someone. IN short He is lying, and also think it is a genuine excuse to reject the obvious. I can keep going dismantling his entire gibberish conversation, but it will take 10 word pages.
Atheism is inversion of logic, which makes it irrational to begin with, so where are you getting this delusional conclusion it is rational from? Atheist cannot justify source of reason from naturalism alone, which by default makes it self-defeating. So, get yourself updated.
@@Theo_Skeptomai Is Atheism a rational position though; if it forces you to live out a lie, as defined by your own understanding of reality? ( E.g. no inherent value to human life )
those who question everything and those who believe everything are destined not to think
Don’t ask him question, he will keep telling I don’t know. Please just ask him to disprove my claims in a logical way. I don’t know is not an objection to any argument..
Are you asserting that a particular god exists in reality?
@@Theo_Skeptomai the necessary existence is a objective reality. Don't even need a religion to believe this fact.
Atheist logic " i dont know and i dont know what you have but i dont believe u" 😂 These atheists are a joke honestly
@yade5979 WHY is the reality of a god _necessary?_ I am not folllowing.
@@publicpm8809 That is certainly not this logic of this atheist.
Zeeshan was close, the atheist was limiting the scope of the chat. Science is about inference and the atheist was okay making inferences until it became the universe.
That's what I wait for every Sunday it's ZEESHAN ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
These “I don’t know” types of people make for very dull and boring conversations
Arheist logic "i dont know but i will not believe anything that you have even with proofs". 😂
Have you ever had a discussion with an actual atheist? It sounds as if you haven't.
@@Theo_Skeptomai eventually all Atheists come to a point " we don't know". Show me one Atheist that can give me the first necessary source for everything but they can't as they have none or give me a proof of something coming from nothing but again atheists can't because they have none! I think it's you who hasn't seen out of your box of Atheism and think everything is in that box 😂
His whole argument is that we don't know for sure what reality is ( or how it behaves ) outside of our known universe. Fine, but that position does NOT preclude God(swt) in any way. So given that his views lead to mountains of existential inadequacies ( no objective moral, no inherent meaning or reason, no inherent human value, no knowledge of the source etc.) that simply AREN'T there if he went with just about any other religious view.. why stick with Atheism in the first place?
Why are you _presupposing_ a particular god is a reality?
@Theo_Skeptomai I am not. I am simply arguing that under the assumption that there are only two options ( either there is a theistic explanation to our reality or there is not ), you DO make an active choice when you say "I don't believe".
Now, since his argument is that we can't draw conclusions about how our reality came to be, he can't logically use that as his basis for non-belief. He would have to look at other evidence. One set of evidence is that the theistic view has much greater explanatory power about existential issues than the atheistic view.
So in his framework, I find it weird that he doesn't seem to be approaching the theistic view more openly ( simply dismissing everything with "I don't know").
@bjorningewesterheim5094 Are you asserting that an individual can simply _choose_ that which he or she believes?
@@Theo_Skeptomai Depends on what you mean by choosing in this context. You choose what evidence to look at and how to evaluate it.
If you come at a problem with your mind already made up, you are likely to end up simply confirming what you already think you know. Whether true or not.
It is not something atheists are immune to. Far, far from it.
@@Theo_Skeptomai You choose what evidence to look at and how to evaluate it. If you come at a problem with your mind made up, chances are you will not find objective truth, but simply confirm your own convictions, whether true or not..
It is not something Atheists are immune to or less prone to than their Theist counterparts. Far, far from it.
That kind of ‘I don’t know’ people, just tell them, I will make claims tell me if it is illogical.. thry will shut doen and ait it is more logical what you say..
Now that’s the worst explanation from atheists compares humans to fish 🐟🙈🙈
sigh..such pretentious jabber from this young lad.
How so?
@@Theo_Skeptomai I will only elaborate on one point - The shear fact he says "he is deluded by his own existence". To make everything erroneous including our own existence is us making out all these experiences as a source of self-duping which is nothing but being overtly sceptic, which is detrimental for any of our intellectual endeavors,, or conclusion based on inference [which he is an advocate of]. Basically, it is lying on a presumption that there is an arrayed abstract space specially available for him where his opinions and conclusions will remain uncontaminated by any previous authoritative influences or experiences. FALSE ASSUMPTION.
He does not live his day to day life thinking that he is deluding the existence of traffic light when he cross the road, put his hand in fire thinking that his sense receptors are deluding him, starve himself thinking the food is a delusion, or his money, bank account, cell phone, is delusion when he purchase or contact someone. IN short He is lying, and also think it is a genuine excuse to reject the obvious. I can keep going dismantling his entire gibberish conversation, but it will take 10 word pages.
@@kakalam6004 What does ANY of this have to do with the rational postion of atheism?
Atheism is inversion of logic, which makes it irrational to begin with, so where are you getting this delusional conclusion it is rational from? Atheist cannot justify source of reason from naturalism alone, which by default makes it self-defeating. So, get yourself updated.
@@Theo_Skeptomai Is Atheism a rational position though; if it forces you to live out a lie, as defined by your own understanding of reality? ( E.g. no inherent value to human life )
🏆
Muslims talking about logic lol😂