RadCap Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 Note that B continues to ignore his primary contradiction and rest his entire position upon it without eliminating that contradiction. As such he continues to behave irrationally. In addition he explicitly rejects the basis of ANY rational conversation whatsoever - or of the MEANS for having any rational conversation. As such, besides invalidating EVERY word he utters, he also rejects the foundation of this forum. Therefore he has no place here and needs to leave. Continued permission granted to him for posting is sanction of his ANTI man ANTI mind philosophy. -- M - thanks for the compliment and good luck with your pursuits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bondolon Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 Note that B continues to ignore his primary contradiction and rest his entire position upon it without eliminating that contradiction. As such he continues to behave irrationally. In addition he explicitly rejects the basis of ANY rational conversation whatsoever - or of the MEANS for having any rational conversation. As such, besides invalidating EVERY word he utters, he also rejects the foundation of this forum. Therefore he has no place here and needs to leave. Continued permission granted to him for posting is sanction of his ANTI man ANTI mind philosophy. You are censoring me. My voice will be heard. I am my own being, and my reason for living is that I exist. You are ANTI freedom ANTI logic ANTI choice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nimble Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 UGGGGG... He isnt arguing that god exists. He is arguing that certainty that god doesnt exist isnt possible. There is no need even for this argument. I cant understand why the He11 any of you are arguing this. Once I understood his (Bondolon) point, I realized that he wasnt really arguing anything. Until someone offers proof of God, the word "god" shouldnt even be used, since it isnt even a valid concept. So can you be certain that what isnt defined isnt real? No you cannot be certain, because you dont even know what god is. So how can you know if it exists or not? It is the equivalent of me saying "akjdklja oajfsda is real." You wouldnt have a clue what i was talking about because I made an assertion without any evidence. You wouldnt even know what i am saying is real. It is undefined. I could be talking about an apple, but just using a different word. You dont know yet. The only thing you should morally do is ignore me, because I havent defined what I am saying is real, and I havent offered any evidence. So you cant say you dont know its not real, and you have no reason to believe that its real. But once I define god the way that christians do, then you can say it isnt real, because they define him as being outside of reality, where nothing real can exist. See his point. It is moot. I dont understand why he asked it....and i dont understand why you are arguing with him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadCap Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 I dont know if your post was aimed at me or not. Just for clarification purposes, I never addressed his 'argument' about god. I originally addressed the underlying and flawed basis of his 'god' assertion. At first I took his intent to be earnest inquiry. Of course it soon became apparent he rejected as invalid the means to have such an inquiry. Then he finally revealed himself to be nothing more than a troll. As such he is now persona non grata. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterSwig Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 UGGGGG... He isnt arguing that god exists. He is arguing that certainty that god doesnt exist isnt possible. There is no need even for this argument. I cant understand why the He11 any of you are arguing this. That was not the only thing he was arguing. He was arguing that certainty, itself, is not possible. And he clearly revealed this sentiment in the end, stating, "I think every person's beliefs are meaningless." Do you believe, along with Bondo, that your beliefs are meaningless? Getting you to accept the idea that you cannot be certain about God's non-existence is merely a step toward getting you to reject the idea of certainty itself. Bondo never defined his vision of God, because he doesn't care about God. All he wants is for you to reject the idea of certainty. And if you let people like that run around, unchallenged, then you end up with more of their kind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RationalBiker Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 And the irony is that he seemed pretty certain that there is no certainty and that no one's beliefs mean anything, including his own. How does one struggle through life with such doubt? If beliefs are meaningless, certainly nothing else has any meaning. VES Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadCap Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 They do not struggle through life with doubt. This is merely a trick to allow them to accept their whims as validly as they accept a logical argument (more so in fact, because logic cannot be truested). As such, it is merely a means for allowing them to be certain they do NOT have to listen to anything but their feelings. It is simply a massive blanking out. But there is no doubt associated with it whatsoever. B's behavior - and absolute statements - are evidence enough of that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nimble Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 That was not the only thing he was arguing. He was arguing that certainty, itself, is not possible. And he clearly revealed this sentiment in the end, stating, "I think every person's beliefs are meaningless." Do you believe, along with Bondo, that your beliefs are meaningless? Getting you to accept the idea that you cannot be certain about God's non-existence is merely a step toward getting you to reject the idea of certainty itself. Bondo never defined his vision of God, because he doesn't care about God. All he wants is for you to reject the idea of certainty. And if you let people like that run around, unchallenged, then you end up with more of their kind. I never agreed that certainty isnt possible. In fact, I argued against that. But when he argues a vague concept without definition, I cannot be certain it doesnt exist, because i cannot be certain even about what he is claiming exists. See my point? So the best thing to do is just ignore him...and the meaningless question. I have better things to do with my time than argue a moot point. Nothing he says will change my belief that certainty is possible. So, I can ignore him, and not feel all that bad. And I dont think my beliefs are meaningless. from his perspective and most others, they are meaningless. But to me, which is all that matters to me, they are very meaningful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommyedison Posted July 10, 2004 Report Share Posted July 10, 2004 Before answering the question whether God exists or not, we have to define God. According to the dictionary, God is either "Regarded as the Creator of all things and requires human worship" and/or "person of supreme value and importance". If you believe in the first definition, then that contradicts science. If you believe in the second, then God has most certainly existed in history. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Areactor Posted July 11, 2004 Report Share Posted July 11, 2004 I'd like to bring it to everyones attention that most theistic arguments about the existence of a deity rests on their belief that the deity has played some part in Man's history. But yes, you guys have clearly rebutted the foundation of the theist belief. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
source Posted July 15, 2004 Report Share Posted July 15, 2004 The only place that can be said to be god's real habitat is the mind of a person who believes in god. Just as a thought exists, so does the thought of god. Thus god's whole being is confined inside the walls of one's own imagination. Whatever one can think of and proclaim it as an attribute of god, then that's what god is - but only inside his mind. God itself, however, is not an autonomous entity. Just like a thought cannot exist without a mind, so can't a god exist without the minds of men who think of it (him or her, whatever). God cannot make decisions, but people who believe in god - and thus have a picture of him stored in their minds - can. And when the issue involves their religion, they always act according to the image of god they've built inside their minds. And since they believe that there really is an entity that sanctioned their action, they are convinced that they are doing the right thing. They are doing it in the name of god. For those who do not believe in god, this means they do it in the name of that what they think/believe god is. This means that they really believe that what they are doing is right. They say that believing in something more powerful than myself is comforting. I wouldn't know. I never did. But if that "something" provides certainty that the decision they made was or is right, I can see how that could be comforting. I know what it's like to be certain of something. The problem arises when the decision is wrong. A person who is convinced of doing the right thing, while doing the wrong thing can be a dangerous person. But such is the nature of those who believe in god. For real, it is not god who sanctions their actions, it is themselves, by means of what they think god is - and what god is is subject to one's whims. Therefore, their actions are subject to their whims. They are not logical or reasonable. They do not follow from facts of reality, but the chaos of thoughts a believer has, if not from some memorized template or routine. Thus, when you ask whether there is a god, what do you mean by it? Do you think of a being that takes care of the universe; of a being that has a plan for humanity? Do you think of an idea of god, such as I described above, which rests in the minds of the believers? Or do you think of that most destructive aspect of god, which shows when a believer decides that what he is about to do is sanctioned by god? If I said that I do not believe in god, you will now notice that I would be denying the existence of that thought; that idea which believers have in their minds, which makes them do irrational things. In effect, I would be saying that the dark ages happened because people are so evil and rotten that they would rather butcher others for no reason, than live in peace and freedom. That idea they have does not have to be called god. It can be anything; anything that removes the burden of responsibility: the common good, the collective... So why do we talk about god in particular? Is it not the same kind of rationalization for irrationality as any other means of enforcing collectivist theories? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Weiss Posted July 15, 2004 Report Share Posted July 15, 2004 ...That idea they have does not have to be called god. It can be anything; anything that removes the burden of responsibility: the common good, the collective... So why do we talk about god in particular? Is it not the same kind of rationalization for irrationality as any other means of enforcing collectivist theories? Ah, but it has the great advantage of being sublimely divorced from reason and any basis in fact. One can believe anything one wants to believe about it. It can explain anything and everything when what you are seeking is anything but the actual explanation. You pray and nothing happens. Ah, you didn't pray hard enough or you didn't do enough good deeds or leave enough in the collection box. So you pray harder, do good deeds, and leave more in the collection box. Still nothing happens. Ah, god works in mysterious ways and/or he is testing me. Occasionally you pray and you actually get something. See, god is good and praying works! Fred Weiss Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aynfan Posted July 15, 2004 Report Share Posted July 15, 2004 But there are no 6-legged vertebrates now or ever. You can not make this assertion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aynfan Posted July 15, 2004 Report Share Posted July 15, 2004 What you see is what you get. No faith required. We also get things we don't see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aynfan Posted July 15, 2004 Report Share Posted July 15, 2004 So I think I might be missing the point of this argument. You say God could exist? How? If god is outside of reality, would that not automatically define him as unreal? Not all religious folks believe that God is by definition outside of the universe. Some say he is the universe and reason the way of apprehending him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aynfan Posted July 15, 2004 Report Share Posted July 15, 2004 My opinion is that a human today claiming to be a perfect being, fully capable in faculty and reason, is tantamount to a caveman believing that his discovery of fire was the "secret" of the universe. Capable is the operative word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aynfan Posted July 15, 2004 Report Share Posted July 15, 2004 Note that B continues to ignore his primary contradiction and rest his entire position upon it without eliminating that contradiction. As such he continues to behave irrationally. In addition he explicitly rejects the basis of ANY rational conversation whatsoever - or of the MEANS for having any rational conversation. As such, besides invalidating EVERY word he utters, he also rejects the foundation of this forum. Therefore he has no place here and needs to leave. Continued permission granted to him for posting is sanction of his ANTI man ANTI mind philosophy. -- M - thanks for the compliment and good luck with your pursuits. He should be burned at the stake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Betsy Posted July 15, 2004 Report Share Posted July 15, 2004 What you see is what you get. No faith required. We also get things we don't see. In a natural world we can investigate, discover, and eventually see them. No faith required ... or desired. Faith would get in the way of investigation, discovery, and seeing the real reasons behind what we get. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidOdden Posted July 15, 2004 Report Share Posted July 15, 2004 You can not make this assertion. Since I actually did do so, I'm puzzled why you would think that it is not possible for me to do something that I actually did, almost a month ago. Or are you disagreeing with the statement itself? If so, please explain your basis for rejecting my statement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aynfan Posted July 15, 2004 Report Share Posted July 15, 2004 In a natural world we can investigate, discover, and eventually see them. No faith required ... or desired. Faith would get in the way of investigation, discovery, and seeing the real reasons behind what we get. I don't disagree. It was meant to be ironical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aynfan Posted July 15, 2004 Report Share Posted July 15, 2004 You can not make this assertion. Since I actually did do so, I'm puzzled why you would think that it is not possible for me to do something that I actually did, almost a month ago. Or are you disagreeing with the statement itself? If so, please explain your basis for rejecting my statement. There is no biological imperative that would prevent such a creature, and the fossel record is neither complete enough nor explored suffiently to claim that lack of a fossel is proof that such a creature never existed. Tangentially, six legged vertibrates have been born as mutations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
source Posted July 16, 2004 Report Share Posted July 16, 2004 Ah, but it has the great advantage of being sublimely divorced from reason and any basis in fact. One can believe anything one wants to believe about it. It can explain anything and everything when what you are seeking is anything but the actual explanation. You pray and nothing happens. Ah, you didn't pray hard enough or you didn't do enough good deeds or leave enough in the collection box. So you pray harder, do good deeds, and leave more in the collection box. Still nothing happens. Ah, god works in mysterious ways and/or he is testing me. Occasionally you pray and you actually get something. See, god is good and praying works! It is the same principle with atheist collectivists/altruists. You work for others and nothing happens. It must be those capitalists that's ruining our ideals. So you work for others and still nothing good comes out of it. It's just been a bad day/month/year. Occasionally, something good happens - a child is born or your kids get an A at school or someone gets married and one says "see, these are the few moments in life for which the torment of work is worth enduring." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Weiss Posted July 16, 2004 Report Share Posted July 16, 2004 It is the same principle with atheist collectivists/altruists. You work for others and nothing happens. It must be those capitalists that's ruining our ideals. So you work for others and still nothing good comes out of it. It's just been a bad day/month/year. Occasionally, something good happens - a child is born or your kids get an A at school or someone gets married and one says "see, these are the few moments in life for which the torment of work is worth enduring." Funny. Socialist always do seem to have excuses for every failure. Still, I think religion has the added attraction of being inherently immune to reason. Marx didn't consider it the "opiate of the masses" for nothing. Fred Weiss Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinD Posted July 16, 2004 Report Share Posted July 16, 2004 You pray and nothing happens. Ah, you didn't pray hard enough or you didn't do enough good deeds or leave enough in the collection box. So you pray harder, do good deeds, and leave more in the collection box. . . . When I was a kid, I prayed every night for a new bicycle. But I soon realized that the Lord, in His wisdom, doesn't work that way. Then I figured out what I needed to do: I stole a bicycle, and then prayed to God to forgive me! (P.S.: I stole this joke from Emo Philips.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinD Posted July 16, 2004 Report Share Posted July 16, 2004 After I posted my last message, this advertisement came up at the top of the page: Talking Jesus Action Doll 12" with full articulation and he will recite the 10 commandments Love those Google ads!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.