Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
10/20/2017 1:01:18 AM
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 8/8/2005 3:15:36 PM EDT
So one of my best friends is an atheist who gives lip service about being tolerant but holds Christianity and its adherents to more stringent standards than other creeds--you know the type. Great guy, otherwise. Incidentally, he is getting married to a born-again Christian gal, but that's another story.

Anyway, he asked me if I knew whether or not Hitler was an atheist; he's reading some book on Nazi Germany.

I told him I didn't think so, that I had heard he was into the occult (hence the inspiration for Raiders of the Lost Ark). He told me that stuff in his book led him to think he was "some kind of theist," then went on to talk about how Martin Luther was an anti-Semite.

Now, I read awhile ago that Luther was pissed that the Jews didn't accept his new-old doctrines about grace, and wanted to make life miserable for them until they converted. But it seems implausible that the Lutheran church is anti-Semitic since so many Jews lived in Germany. Also, Dietrich Bohnhoeffer, a Lutheran pastor, was Hitler's own "personal" prisoner, so he must have found something on which to disagree with Lutherans.


So, my questions are:
What was Hitler's religion? Was he really into the occult?
What was Naziism's stance on religion? Did the party only persecute those religious people who got in their way, or was it a religion all its own, a la Communism? (Hitler did seem to have Messianic pretentions...)


Link Posted: 8/8/2005 3:17:32 PM EDT
HATE.
Link Posted: 8/8/2005 5:16:38 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/8/2005 5:21:31 PM EDT by FLAL1A]
AH was raised Catholic, but even a tiny bit of study will confirm his plan to destroy the RCC and all the rest of Christianity within the greater Reich. There is plenty of documentation of the fact that Hitler and his inner circle planned the destruction of Christianity, but feared that it was too much for the public to swallow with the war going on. It was a big part of the plans for the post-war world had Germany won.

Like many occultists/antireligionists, Hitler thought of himself as "too smart" for the "fairy tales" of faith.

ETA: IIRC, the SS had a full set of ritual designed to supplant baptism, confirmation/first communion, marriage, and burial rites of the church once the war was over, and the rites were celebrated by SS men & families during the war.
Link Posted: 8/8/2005 5:30:26 PM EDT
He was raised Roman Catholic, and he duped that church for a time into thinking he had
good intentions, just as he did most of Europe.

After his power hungry spree began, I think you can safely say he had no religion other than himself.

As for the occult, he spent large amounts of money researching that hoping for some mystical
way to increase his power.

He was, in fact, just a nutjob.
Link Posted: 8/9/2005 3:56:18 AM EDT
FWIW, there's no such thing as an atheist.

Just people who have taken God off the throne, and placed themselves on it.

Such a person was Hitler.

Link Posted: 8/9/2005 5:00:38 AM EDT

Originally Posted By black_irish:
So one of my best friends is an atheist who gives lip service about being tolerant but holds Christianity and its adherents to more stringent standards than other creeds--you know the type. Great guy, otherwise. Incidentally, he is getting married to a born-again Christian gal, but that's another story.

Anyway, he asked me if I knew whether or not Hitler was an atheist; he's reading some book on Nazi Germany.

I told him I didn't think so, that I had heard he was into the occult (hence the inspiration for Raiders of the Lost Ark). He told me that stuff in his book led him to think he was "some kind of theist," then went on to talk about how Martin Luther was an anti-Semite.

Now, I read awhile ago that Luther was pissed that the Jews didn't accept his new-old doctrines about grace, and wanted to make life miserable for them until they converted. But it seems implausible that the Lutheran church is anti-Semitic since so many Jews lived in Germany. Also, Dietrich Bohnhoeffer, a Lutheran pastor, was Hitler's own "personal" prisoner, so he must have found something on which to disagree with Lutherans.


So, my questions are:
What was Hitler's religion? Was he really into the occult?
What was Naziism's stance on religion? Did the party only persecute those religious people who got in their way, or was it a religion all its own, a la Communism? (Hitler did seem to have Messianic pretentions...)





Noone can say for sure, since you can find evidence that he was a Christian, but you can also find evidence that he was into neo-Paganism. Personally I agree with those who said he had no God other than himself.

I don't think nazism tried to replace religion with itself ala communism, but once they were in power Hitler tried to replace Christianity with a belief system (neo-Paganism) that was more conducive to his control of the populace.

I don't see Hitler as a religious man, he was more in line with Marx in viewing religion as a control mechanism.

Link Posted: 8/9/2005 5:05:54 AM EDT

Originally Posted By garandman:
FWIW, there's no such thing as an atheist.

Just people who have taken God off the throne, and placed themselves on it.

Such a person was Hitler.




Hitler was a megalomaniac, delusions of godhood are common in that type of person. Atheists don't believe in any God, much less that they themselves are God.

It would be just as fair to say that Christians have taken God off the throne and put a failed prophet (who in his lifetime was no more successful than David Koresh) in his place.

Link Posted: 8/9/2005 5:08:03 AM EDT
Hitler's regime was hostile to any solid religious faith. He persecuted Jews and Christians alike, as you could find both in concentration camps. The Nazis made moves against Christian churches regularly. It is just not as well known.

Hitler seemed to dabble in all sorts of religious ideas, but I can't see any evidence that he was a true believer in anything except his own Nazi religion.
Link Posted: 8/9/2005 5:35:12 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Dino:
Atheists don't believe in any God, much less that they themselves are God.




Who but God could say there is no God?

For instance, if I tell my boss he can't tell me what to do, I've made myself the boss. UNTIL my boss fired me.

For a person to say there is no God, he takes to himself the authority to say something only God could say. He makes himself God. UNTIL the one true God balances the scales.

This is simple linear logic.


It would be just as fair to say that Christians have taken God off the throne and put a failed prophet (who in his lifetime was no more successful than David Koresh) in his place.




Are you referring to Jesus Christ?

If so, His lifetime was NOT the point, and in using that meauring stick you create a false premise.

Besides, God the Father Himself placed His stamp of authority on the Son.

And to equate Jesus lifetime accomplishments with David Koresh's is about as illegitimate a comaprison as you, usually a level headed, fair guy, have ever used. Koresh ever heal anyone, raise anyone from the dead? Jesus Christ turned the world upside down.

Link Posted: 8/9/2005 5:39:15 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/9/2005 5:39:19 AM EDT
Doesn't matter what Hitler called himself, he has evil...period.


Sgat1r5
Link Posted: 8/9/2005 5:59:59 AM EDT

I read this book a few years back. It says there were ties between occult groups in Germany and the US. It even ties the founder of Scientology to the occult.

www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0826414095/ref=pd_bxgy_text_1/103-0423215-8944600?v=glance&s=books&st=*]Unholy Alliance: A History of the Nazi Involvement With the Occult
Link Posted: 8/9/2005 6:31:37 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/9/2005 6:49:06 AM EDT by Dino]

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By Dino:
Atheists don't believe in any God, much less that they themselves are God.




Who but God could say there is no God?

For instance, if I tell my boss he can't tell me what to do, I've made myself the boss. UNTIL my boss fired me.

For a person to say there is no God, he takes to himself the authority to say something only God could say. He makes himself God. UNTIL the one true God balances the scales.

This is simple linear logic.



no its not. Similar logic would be since I say there is no easter bunny, then I am the easter bunny. Since I say there is no Santa Clause, I must be Santa Clause. It isn't logic at all. Its called a tautology and there is a reason its use is frowned upon in logical arguments.




It would be just as fair to say that Christians have taken God off the throne and put a failed prophet (who in his lifetime was no more successful than David Koresh) in his place.




Are you referring to Jesus Christ?

If so, His lifetime was NOT the point, and in using that meauring stick you create a false premise.

Besides, God the Father Himself placed His stamp of authority on the Son.

And to equate Jesus lifetime accomplishments with David Koresh's is about as illegitimate a comaprison as you, usually a level headed, fair guy, have ever used. Koresh ever heal anyone, raise anyone from the dead? Jesus Christ turned the world upside down.



You're right it is an unfair statement, but it is completely true from a non-Christian perspective. Its also disrespectful to those who are Chrisitan, just as your statement was unfair and disrespectful to atheists. Of course that part totally went over your head.

Link Posted: 8/9/2005 6:33:50 AM EDT

Originally Posted By TomJefferson:
I don't find this strange seeing what he did in his life. I do find the fact he was a vegitarian right up to last meal strange.



that and his history of kindness to animals. Strange man

Link Posted: 8/9/2005 6:52:13 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Dino:
Your right it is an unfair statement, but it is completely true from a non-Christian perspective. Its also disrespectful to those who are Chrisitan, just as your statement was unfair and disrespectful to atheists. Of course that part totally went over your head.




First, I try to balance "respectful" with truthful.

Truthful always gets top billing.

I understand non-Christians don't beleive in the God-ness of Christ - its what makes them NON CHRISTians.

In a technical sense, truth does not have "perspectives." Truth IS.

While you may find my staement disrespectful, it IS truthful. I apologize for being disrespectful, but it is unavoidable.

Only God could say the God of the Bible doesn't exist. Only a superior authority to Yahweh could demote Yahweh into non-existence.

I'm sorry if that is offensive, but its the truth.

And as I said, given essential truth vs. "respectful" (which is a REALLY arbitrary term, with as many definitions as there are people) truth gets top billing every time.



Link Posted: 8/9/2005 7:15:31 AM EDT

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By Dino:
Your right it is an unfair statement, but it is completely true from a non-Christian perspective. Its also disrespectful to those who are Chrisitan, just as your statement was unfair and disrespectful to atheists. Of course that part totally went over your head.




First, I try to balance "respectful" with truthful.

Truthful always gets top billing.

I understand non-Christians don't beleive in the God-ness of Christ - its what makes them NON CHRISTians.

In a technical sense, truth does not have "perspectives." Truth IS.

While you may find my staement disrespectful, it IS truthful. I apologize for being disrespectful, but it is unavoidable.

Only God could say the God of the Bible doesn't exist. Only a superior authority to Yahweh could demote Yahweh into non-existence.

I'm sorry if that is offensive, but its the truth.

And as I said, given essential truth vs. "respectful" (which is a REALLY arbitrary term, with as many definitions as there are people) truth gets top billing every time.






and on the same level, my statement is disrespectful but it is the truth. And, unlike your assertion, its truth that is proveable (as you have admitted by trying to change the standards on which we judge his success)

It illustrates that truth is a far more arbitrary standard than respect

Link Posted: 8/9/2005 8:03:12 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/9/2005 8:17:09 AM EDT by garandman]

Originally Posted By Dino:
and on the same level, my statement is disrespectful but it is the truth. And, unlike your assertion, its truth that is proveable (as you have admitted by trying to change the standards on which we judge his success)



I only changed the standard to a legitimate one.

For instance, I could say "Dino, you have been a completely and totally ineffective manager - for the last fifteen minutes."

Illegitimate statement by me, cuz I put an unnatural constraint of time. As you did, by only segmenting Christ's life.

But even Christ's life was FAR FAR more effective than David Koresh's, making even your inital statement fallacious in the extreme.


It illustrates that truth is a far more arbitrary standard than respect




Truth is absolute. You and I are just both trying to find and understand it.

And the unarguable truth (as evidenced by the fact you've only disagree with the relative "respectfulness" of my position, but have not logically challenged the truth / logic of it) is that in order to say there is no God, you assume the authority to make such a statement.

Given God is the supreme of the universe, you usurp His authority to demote Him to non-existence.

There is no other conclusion as to what an athiest does in saying "There is no God."


Link Posted: 8/9/2005 8:50:55 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/9/2005 8:52:02 AM EDT by Dino]

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By Dino:
and on the same level, my statement is disrespectful but it is the truth. And, unlike your assertion, its truth that is proveable (as you have admitted by trying to change the standards on which we judge his success)



I only changed the standard to a legitimate one.

For instance, I could say "Dino, you have been a completely and totally ineffective manager - for the last fifteen minutes."

Illegitimate statement by me, cuz I put an unnatural constraint of time. As you did, by only segmenting Christ's life.

But even Christ's life was FAR FAR more effective than David Koresh's, making even your inital statement fallacious in the extreme.



Actually no, Koresh was much more successful by any measure if you look at their lives. For one, his followers believed in him enough to die with him when the government came for him. Noone has claimed he resurrected himself yet, but its a lot harder to get people to believe that kind of story now. Put it in a 2000 year old book and its a lot more beleivable for some reason.

Who can say how he will be remembered in 2000 years. Perhaps he will have his own Paul to spread his ministry in the coming years.



It illustrates that truth is a far more arbitrary standard than respect




Truth is absolute. You and I are just both trying to find and understand it.

And the unarguable truth (as evidenced by the fact you've only disagree with the relative "respectfulness" of my position, but have not logically challenged the truth / logic of it) is that in order to say there is no God, you assume the authority to make such a statement.

Given God is the supreme of the universe, you usurp His authority to demote Him to non-existence.

There is no other conclusion as to what an athiest does in saying "There is no God."



I told you your statement was untrue and explained why. It is a false tautology.
Also I would never say I can prove there is no God, which would require a degree of authority I am not willing to assume.

Saying "I do no believe in God" does not require any special authority. Its a statement of belief. "There is no God" is a logical step if you don't believe in God, it does not require special knowledge or authority.

I do not believe in Odin, I assume you do not believe in Odin. I would say Odin does not exist. What would you say? (and if you say he does not exist, are you usurping his place as the All-Father)

If its ok to say Odin or Allah or Brahmin do not exist, why is it any different to say God does not exist? The only difference is its YOUR God I'm talking about, so somehow its an assumption of authority. Yet its ok for you to say all those other Gods do not exist? Right?

Your argument is foolish and only make sense to someone blinded by their religion. The quote in my sig is tailor made for you (and your specious reasoning)


Link Posted: 8/9/2005 9:20:17 AM EDT
I love seeing christians getting bashed for what Hitler did, like they are over in the God = Allah, Allah = God thread. Or maybe what I find so funny is people spouting off about Hitler being a christian when history clearly shows he was not. Oh, sure, he paid lip service to christianity, but as said above, he was first and foremost a politician, and he paid lip service to whatever groups he needed support from.
Link Posted: 8/9/2005 9:35:06 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/9/2005 9:44:36 AM EDT by garandman]

Originally Posted By Dino:
Your argument is foolish and only make sense to someone blinded by their religion. The quote in my sig is tailor made for you (and your specious reasoning)





Methinks thou doest protest too loudly.

Only God could have the authority to dethrone God.



Link Posted: 8/9/2005 10:12:12 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/9/2005 10:13:24 AM EDT by garandman]

Originally Posted By Dino:
I do not believe in Odin, I assume you do not believe in Odin. I would say Odin does not exist. What would you say? (and if you say he does not exist, are you usurping his place as the All-Father)

If its ok to say Odin or Allah or Brahmin do not exist, why is it any different to say God does not exist? The only difference is its YOUR God I'm talking about, so somehow its an assumption of authority. Yet its ok for you to say all those other Gods do not exist? Right?





This demonstrates the folly of atheism.

OF COURSE Odin, Thor, Zeus exist, as gods. LOTS of people worship them as god.

But they are not the one true God.

Why do you think the one true God said " Thou shalt have no other gods before me" ??? God Jehovah also beleives there are other gods.

But the arrogance of atheism says "There is no god."

God ALONE could make such a statement.

Thus the atheist enthrones himself as supreme god, the one true god, able to dethrone all others.

In the VERY same way the one true God dethrones all other gods (and atheists)

Link Posted: 8/9/2005 10:28:34 AM EDT

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By Dino:
I do not believe in Odin, I assume you do not believe in Odin. I would say Odin does not exist. What would you say? (and if you say he does not exist, are you usurping his place as the All-Father)

If its ok to say Odin or Allah or Brahmin do not exist, why is it any different to say God does not exist? The only difference is its YOUR God I'm talking about, so somehow its an assumption of authority. Yet its ok for you to say all those other Gods do not exist? Right?





This demonstrates the folly of atheism.

OF COURSE Odin, Thor, Zeus exist, as gods. LOTS of people worship them as god.

But they are not the one true God.

Why do you think the one true God said " Thou shalt have no other gods before me" ??? God Jehovah also beleives there are other gods.

But the arrogance of atheism says "There is no god."

God ALONE could make such a statement.

Thus the atheist enthrones himself as supreme god, the one true god, able to dethrone all others.

In the VERY same way the one true God dethrones all other gods (and atheists)




Gman, are you saying that Odin is real and that Jehovah has overthrown him?
Link Posted: 8/9/2005 10:28:44 AM EDT
NAZISM
Link Posted: 8/9/2005 10:30:15 AM EDT

Originally Posted By garandman:
FWIW, there's no such thing as an atheist.

Just people who have taken God off the throne, and placed themselves on it.

Such a person was Hitler.





You for real??
Link Posted: 8/9/2005 10:34:49 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/9/2005 10:41:41 AM EDT by garandman]

Originally Posted By Dino:

Gman, are you saying that Odin is real and that Jehovah has overthrown him?



I'm saying Odin is worshipped as god, and therefore IS a god. A real god.

He was never the one true God, so the one true God didn't overthrow Odin, per se, but the one true God HAS staked His claim as the only one true God and therefore all other gods are not the one true God.

See, biblically, God = whatever you worship as supreme.

The atheist worships himself as being Supreme enuf to dethrone (i.e. deny the existence of) the one true God.

Biblically, worship = that to which you ascribe worth.

The atheists ascribes ultimate worth to his own sensory abilities and mental processes.

He "worships" those ( considers them supreme, and thereby himself supreme) to make the "call" that there is no God.

In so worshipping his own cognitive abilities, he considers himself supreme, and therefore God.

<­BR>
Link Posted: 8/9/2005 11:12:01 AM EDT

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By Dino:

Gman, are you saying that Odin is real and that Jehovah has overthrown him?



I'm saying Odin is worshipped as god, and therefore IS a god. A real god.

He was never the one true God, so the one true God didn't overthrow Odin, per se, but the one true God HAS staked His claim as the only one true God and therefore all other gods are not the one true God.

See, biblically, God = whatever you worship as supreme.

The atheist worships himself as being Supreme enuf to dethrone (i.e. deny the existence of) the one true God.

Biblically, worship = that to which you ascribe worth.

The atheists ascribes ultimate worth to his own sensory abilities and mental processes.

He "worships" those ( considers them supreme, and thereby himself supreme) to make the "call" that there is no God.

In so worshipping his own cognitive abilities, he considers himself supreme, and therefore God.



And now you engage in a strawman argument in support of your false tautology.

If you get one more of the classic methods of fallacious reasoning into your train of "thought" you'll be up for a set of steak knives.

Atheists do not believe in a God or Gods.

People who consider themselves to be Gods are called megalomaniacs, not atheists.

Your strawman caricature of an atheist bears no resemblance to me or any other atheist I've ever met.

It might be a fair picture of someone who believes in God, but has decided not to worship him. I have never met anyone like that though. That hypothetical person would still be a theist, not an atheist.



Link Posted: 8/9/2005 11:17:01 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/9/2005 11:18:18 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Dino:

And now you engage in a strawman argument in support of your false tautology.

If you get one more of the classic methods of fallacious reasoning into your train of "thought" you'll be up for a set of steak knives.



Funny, but just calling "strawman" or "tautology" DOES NOT automatically win you the day.

You MUST address my logic point by point, line by line.

As yet, you have not done that.

It is UNARGUABLE that the atheist considers his own copgnitive ability to be sufficiently supreme to dethrone (deny the existence of ) God.

ONLY God could have that cognitive ability.

While the atheist may not consider himself God per se, he usurps an ability and authority ONLY God COULD have.

Therefore, he makes himself God.




Your strawman caricature of an atheist bears no resemblance to me or any other atheist I've ever met.

It might be a fair picture of someone who believes in God, but has decided not to worship him. I have never met anyone like that though. That hypothetical person would still be a theist, not an atheist.






Fine, then we established I'm not talking about you

Link Posted: 8/9/2005 11:20:57 AM EDT
Who but God could say a unicorn does not exist anywhere in the universe?

Only God is big enuf to see the entire universe all at once, to be able to make such a statement.

And only God could say that God does not exist.



Link Posted: 8/9/2005 11:39:44 AM EDT

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By Dino:

And now you engage in a strawman argument in support of your false tautology.

If you get one more of the classic methods of fallacious reasoning into your train of "thought" you'll be up for a set of steak knives.



Funny, but just calling "strawman" or "tautology" DOES NOT automatically win you the day.

You MUST address my logic point by point, line by line.

As yet, you have not done that.

It is UNARGUABLE that the atheist considers his own copgnitive ability to be sufficiently supreme to dethrone (deny the existence of ) God.

ONLY God could have that cognitive ability.

While the atheist may not consider himself God per se, he usurps an ability and authority ONLY God COULD have.

Therefore, he makes himself God.




thats just it Gman you don't have logic, you only have the appearance of logic.

Your logic relies on an unprovable premise that God exists. Then it also lies on the premise that said God has the powers you say he does (and how would you know that, only God can know what God is capable of, right?)

Belief in God is not logical, its a matter of faith. They apparently didn't cover science at BJU, but they should have at least covered faith and the difference between faith and logic.

after that you still have statements like "It is UNARGUABLE that the atheist considers his own copgnitive ability to be sufficiently supreme to dethrone (deny the existence of ) God"

actually it is arguable. The only requirement for that knowledge is omniscience. Omniscience alone doesn't qualify you for godhead (omnipotence and omnipresence is a requirement and sometimes omnibenevolence).

this is besides the fact that most atheists don't think they have complete knowledge, they simply have enough to determine there is no more evidence for God than there is for the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, or IIPEW's (Invisible Intangible Pink Elephants with Wings)

You make the assumption that to disbelieve something you have to prove it doesn't exist 100%. Most logical people prefer to look at the evidence for something to determine what to believe. Since your not a logical person, that might be new to you.

Your entire argument is nothing but fallacious reasoning based on illogical premises that only someone with a theistic faith would agree are valid.

There is nothing that is a smoking gun that says "Aha, God does not exist", but there is also nothing that is a smoking gun that says "Aha, God must exist"

Its a matter of faith, so leave it to faith. Your not educated enough to construct a logical argument, so don't try. Or ask someone like ETH for help, he at least is entertaining.

Link Posted: 8/9/2005 11:46:39 AM EDT
thule occultist
Link Posted: 8/9/2005 11:49:23 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/9/2005 11:50:40 AM EDT by Dino]

Originally Posted By garandman:
Who but God could say a unicorn does not exist anywhere in the universe?

Only God is big enuf to see the entire universe all at once, to be able to make such a statement.

And only God could say that God does not exist.






so if I say I don't believe in Unicorns I am making myself God?

just want to make sure I understand your thought process

p.s. what about if I say I don't believe in a 3 assed monkey, does that make me God? After all only God can know for sure if there is or is not a planet full of 3 assed monkeys somewhere in the cosmos...

Link Posted: 8/9/2005 11:52:45 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Dino:

so if I say I don't believe in Unicorns I am making myself God?

just want to make sure I understand your thought process






Making ANY definitive statement, outside what is definitively stated in Scripture, the maker of such a statement prsumes the authority to make that statement.

Making the definitive statement "There is no God" assumes, in fact usurps, supreme god-like authority.

The authority of God.



Link Posted: 8/9/2005 11:58:00 AM EDT

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By Dino:

so if I say I don't believe in Unicorns I am making myself God?

just want to make sure I understand your thought process






Making ANY definitive statement, outside what is definitively stated in Scripture, the maker of such a statement prsumes the authority to make that statement.

Making the definitive statement "There is no God" assumes, in fact usurps, supreme god-like authority.

The authority of God.






so since scripture says nothing about the atomic weight of Gold, stating the atomic weight of Gold would be presumptive of God's power?

Link Posted: 8/9/2005 11:58:36 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Dino:
thats just it Gman you don't have logic, you only have the appearance of logic.



That's not really a productive comment.


Your logic relies on an unprovable premise that God exists.


No, it only presumes that the person making the statement "There is no God" has the authority to make such a statement. THAT kind of authority is ONLY in perview on "god" (ONLY a god could be everywhere at all times to have the knowledge and proof to make such a statement)

If someone does what ONLY God could do, they must BE God. ONLY God has the knowledge / authoruty to make the statement "There is no God." Thus the atheist usurps the authority of God.

Tho I think I'm done trying to explain it. I've enjoyed the discussion, but we've passed the point of productive discussion.

Have a nice day.

Link Posted: 8/9/2005 11:59:12 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Dino:

so since scripture says nothing about the atomic weight of Gold, stating the atomic weight of Gold would be presumptive of God's power?




No, stating the atomic weight of gold, presumes the authority to weigh gold.

Don't need God to do that.

I was VERY careful in my original statement - please be as concientious in your reading and comprehension, to wit:



Making ANY definitive statement, outside what is definitively stated in Scripture, the maker of such a statement prsumes the authority to make that statement.



The statement "There is no God" presumes the authority of God,as I've explained a dozen time.


Again, I'm done here, with you.


have a wonderful day..

Link Posted: 8/9/2005 12:05:28 PM EDT

Originally Posted By garandman:

Have a nice day.




you too man

Top Top