I do like brown sauce and the only thing I put red on is chips.
Heretic.
I do like brown sauce and the only thing I put red on is chips.
Red or brown?![]()
Surely HP is the democratically elected parliament of sauce?

Surely HP is the democratically elected parliament of sauce?
No, it's not.
When what someone's proposing has been proven to be wrong repeatedly, yet they post it anyway, then there's no assumption and no arrogance.
Post crap and it gets called crap.
Nothing has a creator.
You've repeatedly claimed that everything has a creator, but have yet to show that one thing has one.
Are you denying the existence of physical matter now?
Completely untrue.
There was no third eye.
Where did you get that from?
This is completely untrue and I've already debunked it.
No, they're not.
It's just another one of your baseless claims that's been drummed into you by your fellow theists.
Nothing has a creator.
Prove that 1 thing does.
The Zionit elites choice no doubt?![]()
would that not be daddies?

Nobody has 'disproved' God
If its untrue name just 1 thing, as I have repeatedly asked and you have failed to answer
you have not 'debunked' the darwin and the evolution of the eye. You posted a link which explains it
see wikki for athiesm. clearly explains it and you like wikki
you have 2
You can't disprove god.
http://www.users.qwest.net/~jcosta3/article_dragon.htm
I know! as a creator anyway
I've repeatedly answered you, so that's an obvious lie.
can you show me where you have named 1 thing?
I've debunked your claims about it being unfit as a part of evolution.
No you posted a link etc and I showed you the errors/flaws in your assertion.
First line of the Wikipedia entry on atheism:
Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.
and the rest. I put athiesm in 2 categories. one you cite and one which is anti god
Humans aren't magicked out of thin air by their parents.
That's not creation.
Sorry.
Try again.
A) What is the belief you feel atheists have? Atheists are a wide group of people who only share a dis-belief in god. How does that manifest itself into a common belief in something else?I have never suggested that athiesm is a theory as such. If anything I believe athiesm is a belief in some cases
The OP was not about religion but what athiests believe to have caused us to 'be'. Us being the universe.
As usual it seems the athiests want to get back to attacking religion as it is safer ground, and avoids the 'hard' questions
everything as we know it has a source/origin/creator.
cre·a·tion/krēˈāSHən/
Noun:
1.The action or process of bringing something into existence
I know! as a creator anyway
can you show me where you have named 1 thing?
No you posted a link etc and I showed you the errors/flaws in your assertion.
and the rest. I put athiesm in 2 categories. one you cite and one which is anti god
cre·a·tion/krēˈāSHən/
Noun:
1.The action or process of bringing something into existence
A) What is the belief you feel atheists have? Atheists are a wide group of people who only share a dis-belief in god. How does that manifest itself into a common belief in something else?
for me true athiesm doesnt 'bother' itself with god. Those who come together for the sole purpose of attacking religion are 'irreligious' imo
B) You say atheists want to get back to attacking religion as if that's unusual - again the definition of an atheist is someone who doesn't believe in god, so of course they attack religion.
I disagree. however my point was its 'safer ground' to attack religion than answer what is at hand/being asked. and it doesnt have to be a conspiracy, simply an interest
C) You say everything has a source/origin/creator which is true but why is it that because you don't know the source or origin of the universe you have to believe that there is some kind of meta-physical creator?
well it goes without saying that IF everything has a source/origin/creator then so must the universe. What that creator is is another question. Most on here just jump to God as the given conclusion
For me people who need the crutch of religion to explain the unexplained lack intelligence. The unexplained is a challenge for enquiring minds to search for answers, not a big scarey thing that we should invent fairytales to make go away.
for me true athiesm doesnt 'bother' itself with god.
No, you can't disprove the existence of something that has no consistent definition.
When that definition actually claims that the creature is unknowable, it's also unprovable.
To your limited mind maybe. The fact is everything has a source/origin/creator. Just because we dont know it doesnt mean it doesnt exist
You didn't read the link either, as usual.
I've repeatedly said everything.
Nothing is created.
and you are wrong everything has a source/origin/creator, which we have gone through the rest is semantics
There were no errors in it.
You just asserted that there were, without giving any examples.
I pointed you to it. You choosing not to accept what is in front of you is your problem. Darwins natural selection theory did not/does not fit
so an alternative model was 'found'
You've made the second one up, unfortunately.
That's the definition for anti-theism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-theism
clearly calls them irreligious too. so anti god
Precisely.
Nothing has ever been proven to have come into existence.
For me, true theism is the belief in fairies and dragons, but only pink ones.
Can we all just redefine words whenever we feel like it?
To your limited mind maybe. The fact is everything has a source/origin/creator. Just because we dont know it doesnt mean it doesnt exist
and you are wrong everything has a source/origin/creator, which we have gone through the rest is semantics
I pointed you to it. You choosing not to accept what is in front of you is your problem. Darwins natural selection theory did not/does not fit
so an alternative model was 'found'
clearly calls them irreligious too. so anti god
without a creator that is true