The ancient Greeks mentioned that the sun was in an orbit of its own and wasn't stagnant? I haven't been able to find that via Google. Read all of my freaking post.
Yes, it's called the Geocentric Model, from Aristotle (Ancient Greek, born 384 BCE) and Ptolemy (Ancient Greco-Egyptian, born circa 100 CE)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geocentric_model - Aristotle used 800 years of research that came prior to him, along with his own observations to arrive at his model.
Sometimes called the Ptolemaic Model, it claims the Moon, Sun, and other planets orbit in a circular motion around the Earth. The Quran verses you shared seem to mention the Sun and Moon in orbits, which certainly wouldn't be new information by the time the Quran was written. It just comes across as a product of the times that the book was written. That would have been knowledge at that time in history, it's not something new that the Quran amazingly predicted. Nor does it somehow prove your god is real.
It's worth noting that Aristotle and Ptolemy were partially incorrect in two major ways: Orbits are usually elliptical rather than circular, and it's the Sun in the middle rather than the Earth. But still, the point is that the concept of orbits predates the Quran by over 1000 years.
Ako is falsely saying I have lied. Trying to imply a whole answer indirectly =/= dishonesty. I have never ignored a single piece of counter-evidence. Stop being that guy. Quit your injustifiable, stupid insults.
If you've never ignored any counter-evidence, then why haven't you admitted your arguments are incorrect? Will you admit your arguments are incorrect?
Now quit talking irrelevant trash. Now that I think about it, your whole "no claim, therefore burden of proof is on you" is nothing but a dirty, cheap debating strategy.
That is basic logic. I haven't made a claim so I have nothing to prove. You have made a claim, so the burden of proof is on you to back up your claim.
Remember, you're the one who said you have evidence that your god is real.
Imagine if the burden of proof didn't work like this. I could just say: I hereby claim the Flying Spaghetti Monster, full of sauce and cheese, is the creator of everything and the only true deity. Now, without providing evidence for my own claim, it is apparently your burden to disprove my claim. Have fun. I guess I can just make any claim and get away with it!
Here's some food for thought, which I'm sure you're about to immediately defy while you're most likely already pressing the "Reply" button as you're reading this:
AKO'S ARGUMENT IN A NUTSHELL: Atheists don’t claim that God doesn’t exist. They lack belief in God. The burden of proof for God is on the theist, not the atheist.
This isn't so much an argument, it's just the position I'm in. I didn't make a claim. That's it.
But you're exactly right, and you worded that pretty well. I'm so glad you've FINALLY acknowledged this position without inserting words into my mouth. Took, what, 3 months?
This is nothing but a technicality you're using to try to put the burden on the other side. Since “atheism” means “without a belief in God”, you're not claiming anything and therefore supposedly do not have to prove anything. And thus you claim the burden of proof is on me, who claims that God exists.
Yes, you've got this right. I don't know what you mean by technicality though - I'm not
trying to put the burden on the other side, because that's the
only place the burden of proof ever lays: on the person who makes the claim. You mean like I'm technically correct on this basic flow of argument logic? I'll take that. Technically correct is a pretty damn good kind of correct. With my Flying Spaghetti Monster example in mind, do you honestly think the burden of proof requirement should be the other way around?
However, this makes little difference either way because your core philosophy toward God is still the same. You believe that there is no God, and you know it. You emphasize this in order to try to put yourself in an unattackable position. It’s a semantic ploy. To try to be consistent with it, you keep saying “There is no evidence for God” rather than “God doesn't exist”.
DON'T YOU PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH YOU LITTLE FUCK. You little fuck. Fuck you. I never made the assertion that I am certain that there's no gods, and I have never claimed to have evidence that shows that there is absolutely no god. Stop being an asshole. Don't you tell me what I know. Again, if you want to actually ask my position on something, you may ask me. BUT DO NOT PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH. Dishonest little fuck.
What is honestly the matter with you? Why do you keep doing this weird dishonest bullshit over and over again? Cut it the fuck out already. Holy shit man.
Until there is good evidence for your god, I won't believe in it. That's my position on your god.
You can’t really prove that God doesn’t exist because I can’t prove a negative.
Your logic is exactly backwards. I'm the one who can't prove the negative, not you. You're making a positive claim (that your god exists). You also say you have evidence for your positive claim, which is what I want you to share. So far your evidence posts have been very weak, often displaying fundamental flaws in your understanding of science and history. You can improve on this, but viewing these subjects from such a narrow religious standpoint is hindering your understanding rather than helping you, unfortunately.
Regardless, you obviously believe that deep down that there isn't a God or deity anyway, which is prevalent in your attempts to debunk and refute every single argument for the existence of God. Therefore, this trivial debate about the implications of the word “atheism” seems pointless in substance.
Again, if you want to ask me my position, ASK.
And now to wait for you to attack me with a copy-paste claim.
What? Aren't you the one who copy-pastes entire webpages without sourcing them? Wtf.
I rarely even copy-paste stuff, and almost always source my information when I feel it's relevant to do so.
-------
theirs no evidence that prove god exists, although I believe in god, their is no evidence. its a belief, people choose to believe in god. stop trying to prove god exists to someone who obviously doesn't believe in god.
Octo drops an honesty bomb. Why can't you be this honest, Ender?
I appreciate your honesty on this, Octo. I had one of these conversations with Witch once too, and he was also extremely honest, which I also appreciated greatly. It's so nice when people are honest.
