And while I may not share your view, I totally get it and respect it. Especially for being stated so eloquently.
Become a Patron!
CLOSED- Debate Invitation to ECF Troublemakers
- Thread starter pcrdude
- Start date
- Status
Okay, you said:
The presence of "facts" is somewhat irrelevant. You can present "facts" to hard-core Legalist Christians about the age of the Earth and dinosaurs and host of other topics and they will flat-out deny and refute your "facts" and interject their own "facts". Faith can enter the picture anywhere, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that would seem to refute the position of a person's beliefs.
And I think I see what you're leading with on the "..in the absence of facts, faith can run rampant" - that the lack of factual support one way or another lends itself to the insertion of faith. Which it can and has done, something that I will not argue. But a vacuum of facts is just that - a lack of something. People can - and will - insert whatever they "bring to the table" when confronted with that. For some it's faith, for others it's logical inquiry. Presumption of which it might be is the insertion of our personal bias on the matter.
Just curious as to who/what this was in response to?
Tweak a condition or two in the first seconds after the Big Bang and we end up with.. not this universe.
So your objection is the word "facts?" Seems to me that we're saying basically the same thing. Am I wrong?
Perhaps you are, or I'm not being clear - something that happens with me from time to time.
Your bias is one of a proclaimed atheist. Your view is shaped around that. You're gonna see it a certain way because that's what you know. "Facts" can be irrelevant in the face of certain views. And there are about seven billion points of view on this planet, each one unique. I can't presume to understand yours anymore than you can understand mine. Screaming at someone that theirs is "wrong" is absurd.
well put...let those who have eyes see and ears hear.
Reading some of the posts in this thread?
Man, I just don't get how/why this is so confusing.
How many people here have ever said 'I don't believe __________'
Now ask yourself how different that statement is when you flip it around to 'I believe __________ doesn't'
Who even talks like that.
I don't believe you.
I believe you not.
Seriously?
But let's just say maybe, just maybe there IS a god(s) out there.
Ok, fine..
Which one?
There is more than 5000.
Seems kinda silly doesn't it?
All those flavors to choose from.
Better hope you picked the right one.
And given the choice, who would want to worship a hateful, genocidal, misogynistic, pedophiliac, racist slaver?
Where is the god of tits and wine?
Man, I just don't get how/why this is so confusing.
How many people here have ever said 'I don't believe __________'
Now ask yourself how different that statement is when you flip it around to 'I believe __________ doesn't'
Who even talks like that.
I don't believe you.
I believe you not.
Seriously?
But let's just say maybe, just maybe there IS a god(s) out there.
Ok, fine..
Which one?
There is more than 5000.
Seems kinda silly doesn't it?
All those flavors to choose from.
Better hope you picked the right one.
And given the choice, who would want to worship a hateful, genocidal, misogynistic, pedophiliac, racist slaver?
Where is the god of tits and wine?
Of course, this debate has been going on, and will continue for a long, long, time. As usual, SM appears to present a logical argument, but on closer inspection, it doesn't hold up. And here is why:
An existential claim (that of something existing) is a binary proposal. It either does, or it doesn't. Like being alive or dead, pregnant or not pregnant. A theist claims that a deity exists. They make no scientific claim about this (if they are smart), but rely on faith in the unprovable. A skeptic may say "I don't believe you unless you have proof". That's actually a good position (scientifically), and is consistent with the agnostic position. In this case, the theist makes what is known in philosophy as a "truth claim". The agnostic denies the truth claim is supported, and therefore withholds assent.
The atheist position, on the other hand is not the same as the agnostic's in this example. In this case, the atheist makes the truth claim that a deity does not exist (even if they don't admit it). Otherwise, they would be an agnostic. Remember that an existential claim is a binary proposal.
But it is illogical to reject a deity, then hedge that it might exist.
An existential claim (that of something existing) is a binary proposal. It either does, or it doesn't. Like being alive or dead, pregnant or not pregnant. A theist claims that a deity exists. They make no scientific claim about this (if they are smart), but rely on faith in the unprovable. A skeptic may say "I don't believe you unless you have proof". That's actually a good position (scientifically), and is consistent with the agnostic position. In this case, the theist makes what is known in philosophy as a "truth claim". The agnostic denies the truth claim is supported, and therefore withholds assent.
The atheist position, on the other hand is not the same as the agnostic's in this example. In this case, the atheist makes the truth claim that a deity does not exist (even if they don't admit it). Otherwise, they would be an agnostic. Remember that an existential claim is a binary proposal.
But it is illogical to reject a deity, then hedge that it might exist.
in the end who cares? I am more than happy to let aethist believe whatever they want..hell I encourage them to stand by their beliefs even considering what we know about the nature of the Universe is just a hair's breadth above what a chimp knows,and the vast majority of aethists on this thread have the scientific training of your averge high school drop out.... to discuss the nature of man's soul with aethists is pointless...like casting pearls before swine. watching paint dry is more interesting.
There's no such thing as a soul.
All you got is an ego, which man calls a soul.
Unless......you got proof?
All you got is an ego, which man calls a soul.
Unless......you got proof?
I don't label myself as an a-flying spaghetti monster (aFSM). A denier of the FSM. It is a non-issue to me. The truth claim lacks support. I don't deny that FSM exists. I am agnostic about the existence of FSM, but not "aFSM".
let those who have eyes see and ears hear......why waste time discussing the color of the flower with the color blind. better to share the experince with those who can see it...unlike the bohdisattva I say "fuck them" they're on their own. or as Jesus said.I don't label myself as an a-flying spaghetti monster (aFSM). A denier of the FSM. It is a non-issue to me. The truth claim lacks support. I don't deny that FSM exists. I am agnostic about the existence of FSM, but not "aFSM".
"If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, leave that home or town and shake the dust off your feet."
as for debating the possiblity of the existence of God...the aethist here don't have enough scientific training to teach a junior high school science class...the basis for their hostility toward God is derived from their crazy grammies locking them in the closet overnight for not learning their bible verses or having their ass switched when young for being caught in inappropraite sexual expermintation and their grammy trying to beat Satan out of them...it is not derived from a sincere study of either science or spirituality.
Last edited:
Don't confuse the acts of man for the acts of (a) God.
There's something in there though about having compassion, even for those that would turn you away.
compassion is not sympathy....extending compassion includes the realization that this being is where it is at and that sometimes there is nothing you can do about that, it is not in your hands. we all get there in our own time and in our own way, and if they need to bang their head against the wall for a while so be it and that's OK
Last edited:
Yes, I like this. In the face of the magnificence of the Universe, it is wholly arrogant to claim that I possibly could understand it all.
Compassion is seeing someone in struggle and asking "What can I do to help you?"
Sympathy is seeing someone struggle and saying "Oh, that's too bad."
Ahh, that context helps.
sometimes the only help they want is for you to let them do it themselves.sometimes the best help you can give is to tell them do it yourself.
What I see Jesus was saying is that...look at this being's level of awarness what you are trying to share with them..they can't grasp...it is as pointless to share what you see with them as it would be to share geometry with a kindergaten student. you might plant a seed,but it may be liftimes before it sprouts. and they may very well curcify you for your troubles...there are people who can see what you are saying and can profit from your communication so go talk to them....because they want to communicate with you.
Last edited:
I feel no hostility whatsoever, pulsevape. I simply do not believe. I don't need a science degree for that.
@pulsevape was referring to the other argumentative party in the debate. I think he's cool with you and your position.
Insert whichever god of choice. The acts of man done in "his" name are not the acts of that god. Comprende?
When did I "scream at" someone that their beliefs are wrong?
Edit: scroll back in the thread, because the screaming has been AT me and the content of that screaming is that MY viewpoint is wrong, so ...
Last edited:
I don't label myself as an a-flying spaghetti monster (aFSM). A denier of the FSM. It is a non-issue to me. The truth claim lacks support. I don't deny that FSM exists. I am agnostic about the existence of FSM, but not "aFSM".
You're arguing with yourself again.
I don't "deny" the existence of god(s). I don't believe in gods. Because no evidence suggests they exist. I don't believe in the negative any more than I believe in the positive.
Your continuing problem here is thinking that atheism is a belief. That's incorrect.
How Christian of you.
I haven't expressed any hostility towards either God or believers in God. Meanwhile, the stream of ad hom attacks from you and PCR haven't stopped.
Self awareness. Consider it.
NO, you really are saying the same basic thing. His objection was to faith only running rampant in the ABSENCE of fatcts...when it is demonstrable that faith will run rough shod OVER facts in many cases.
That's what I thought.
The hinge is the word "facts." Probably clearer to have said "data."
As per my example earlier:
Cup behind a curtain. No data showing its capacity. Faith can enter the picture here.
Cup exposed. Data available showing its capacity. Faith can not enter the picture.
A theist claims a deity or deities exist. An atheist makes no such claim. A theist bases his/her conclusion on faith. An atheist bases his/her conclusion on data (or the complete lack of data in this case.) A theist believe that there is a god(s). An atheist does not believe there is a god.
So you're STILL stuck in a semantic loop because you fail to make the CRITICAL distinction between "I do not believe in" and "I believe there isn't."
f1r3b1rd
https://cookingwithlegs.com/
Staff member
Senior Moderator
VU Donator
Diamond Contributor
VU Challenge Team
Member For 5 Years
VU Patreon
I feel sorry for those who are so outspoken on needing proof. It's not only sad that they are so close minded; but, even more so to make such an effort to take away others beliefs.
But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. ... Reason and free enquiry are the only effectual agents against error.
-Jefferson had the right idea-and it cuts both ways
Close minded is the exact opposite of what a skeptic is. Additionally, I'd like to point out that I have NOT made ANY effort to "take away others' beliefs." The opposite is true in this case as well. I've been very respectful of the beliefs of others, but my atheism has been under direct attack since page one.
No argument there.
Not sure what you're referencing here.
The spirit is willing ,but the flesh is weak...that is why a meditation on enlightened teachings are neccessary...least we be drawn into the tempataion of breaking ones foot off in the ass of sniveling craven liitle pieces of shit like you.
It may not do any injury for your neighbor to say they believe in god(s),
but when folks are pushing for others to be legislated based on their beliefs we have a problem.
Christians FREAK OUT when discussing Muslims/Sharia Law, but they will turn right around and want to do the same thing.
You know how most atheists become atheist?
They start by reading the bible without their rose colored glasses..
Not long after that is when they start asking questions, and researching for themselves.
Hell, most christians think the gospels were actually written by men named Mark, Matthew, John and Luke.
.....they're not, btw. Most biblical scholars agree they are anonymous.
Same as the first 5 books of the old testament.
No one named Moses wrote that shit.
Skeptics do not have a closed mind.
That would be the religious.
They will completely shut down if you introduce anything to them that runs counter to what they believe.
It's called cognitive dissonance.
Which one of your enlightened and meditative leaders told you it was a good idea to attack people with ad homs and nasty smears? Jesus? Was it Jesus? Kinda doubt it...
f1r3b1rd
https://cookingwithlegs.com/
Staff member
Senior Moderator
VU Donator
Diamond Contributor
VU Challenge Team
Member For 5 Years
VU Patreon
if it is not supposed to bother anyone that someone does not believe than it cant bother someone that another does.
furthermore, this country was founded based on the tenants of judeo chritian doctrine. Historically speaking that is an inarguable fact. not the belief in god but rather the management and societal behavior.
I wasn't aware you were familar with any of the teachings of Jesus...I thought your filed of expertise was confined to ball gags and and butt plugs, as I said the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak.
Are you reading the thread? I've never expressed any bother at the beliefs of others. People are entitled to believe whatever they want to. But it appears that a whole bunch of people are in fact bothered by my atheism. To the point of calling me the most nasty and vicious names they can come up with.
Not really. The Founders were enlightenment philosophers. They were mostly Christians, but they very intentionally wrote a secular government into existence so that no religion would have primacy above any other.
I wasn't aware you were familar with any of the teachings of Jesus...I thought your filed of expertise was confined to ball gags and and butt plugs, as I said the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak.
THERE'S your childish homophobia! I was wondering where it went.
Yeah, shouting that I'm a sexual deviant doesn't actually have any impact on me since it's just an impotent lie you're throwing at me out of some kind of misguided frustration and anger. Makes you look like a genuine prick. Happy about that?
dude you assume much...I in no way allude to homosexuality that is your assumption why your mind should go there is anyones guess. seeing as how a fetish for ball gags and butt plugs is not confined to homosexuals....as for deviant.....that is a social construct....whatever blows your skirt up is my motto.
If that were the case, you would think they would have put god somewhere in the founding documents.
They are, after all, the FOUNDING documents. But if that's not enough;
It is stated in no uncertain terms that this nation was, in fact, NOT founded on the christian religion.
Article 11
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/bar1796t.asp
Says the guy who keeps referencing the rape scene in Deliverance.
Good thing you have a mature, compelling argument
obviously it was a dumb idea to even attempt a two way discussion.......
enjoy ya'lls total stalemate
What stalemate? Looks to me like a bunch of even tempered atheists trying to defend against a bunch of rabid grudge holders who don't really want to debate so much as they want to vent their bladders at the big bad Surf Monkey.
- Status