Is God Knowable? This is the question I think people are meaning to ask
[rpenner feel free to delete if inappropriate]
QUOTE (TracerTong+Jun 4 2009, 03:56 PM)
Is God Knowable? This is the question I think people are meaning to ask
[rpenner feel free to delete if inappropriate]
We can know His love by faith since He is nonphysical? 1st John 4, we can love each other?
[rpenner feel free to delete if inappropriate]
We can know His love by faith since He is nonphysical? 1st John 4, we can love each other?
Would answering your own question with more questions be a sign of insanity?
The better question is can we know who knows God?
Do you know God?
Newguy?
NoEda?
Deadbeat?
Dad1?
Pnelson?
Joeseph Smith?
Jim Jones?
Which one is right?
And was God lieing to the others?
Do you know God?
Newguy?
NoEda?
Deadbeat?
Dad1?
Pnelson?
Joeseph Smith?
Jim Jones?
Which one is right?
And was God lieing to the others?
QUOTE (buttershug+Jun 4 2009, 12:57 PM)
The better question is can we know who knows God?
Do you know God?
Pnelson?
If you are asking?
Yes, what about it?
Do you know God?
Pnelson?
If you are asking?
Yes, what about it?
QUOTE (pnelson419+Jun 5 2009, 12:42 AM)
If you are asking?
Yes, what about it?
I should have put "does" in front of the other names.
I saw a newspaper article a couple weeks ago about a small plane crash. The pilot was not found in the plane or anywhere.
I thougth hey the rapture happened and the one guy that got it right was taken.
My point is so many people claim it's easy to get in touch with God but then they all are so divergent about God.
If we all went to a Richard Dawkins lecture there would be differences of opinion but there would be a lot commonality of descriptions of the encounter.
And he doesn't even have any supernatural powers to communicate with.
Yes, what about it?
I should have put "does" in front of the other names.
I saw a newspaper article a couple weeks ago about a small plane crash. The pilot was not found in the plane or anywhere.
I thougth hey the rapture happened and the one guy that got it right was taken.
My point is so many people claim it's easy to get in touch with God but then they all are so divergent about God.
If we all went to a Richard Dawkins lecture there would be differences of opinion but there would be a lot commonality of descriptions of the encounter.
And he doesn't even have any supernatural powers to communicate with.
QUOTE (FatherJFair+Jun 5 2009, 06:44 AM)
God intended us to know him. That is why he left us the Holy Scripture's.
If you need or seek guidance, i will be gladly at my uttermost to help you.
Father John Fair.
Then explain why so many people get differnt answers?
Does God lie to most people?
If you need or seek guidance, i will be gladly at my uttermost to help you.
Father John Fair.
Then explain why so many people get differnt answers?
Does God lie to most people?
QUOTE (Fior+Jun 5 2009, 12:16 PM)
Hi,
Sorry to interrupt, but perhaps their intepretation is wrong (more like completely illogical). But each to their own i guess.
Thank you.
But they don't add, "if you interpret it correctly".
They simple say something like "open your heart to God, and you will know him".
Sorry to interrupt, but perhaps their intepretation is wrong (more like completely illogical). But each to their own i guess.
Thank you.
But they don't add, "if you interpret it correctly".
They simple say something like "open your heart to God, and you will know him".
QUOTE (Fior+Jun 5 2009, 12:28 PM)
Hi Buttershug,
Yes unfortunately, there is no instruction/set rules for them to clearly follow in how they intepret the bible. Can you really know God? A lot claim they can, or at least claim they undertsand him and convey his message (usually for reasons of self interest.)
Thank you.
But some give very simple clear instructions.
And if the instructions don't work they blame the people following their instructions.
Yes unfortunately, there is no instruction/set rules for them to clearly follow in how they intepret the bible. Can you really know God? A lot claim they can, or at least claim they undertsand him and convey his message (usually for reasons of self interest.)
Thank you.
But some give very simple clear instructions.
And if the instructions don't work they blame the people following their instructions.
QUOTE (buttershug+Jun 4 2009, 05:57 PM)
The better question is can we know who knows God?
Do you know God?
Newguy?
NoEda?
Deadbeat?
Dad1?
Pnelson?
Joeseph Smith?
Jim Jones?
Which one is right?
And was God lieing to the others?
I don't know God, but believe it is possible for people to know of his existence if he exists. No one can know if he does not, but it seems more than likely that some people know if he does. I believe unless he gives someone the equivalent of Saul's Damascus Highway people would have to approach him through prayer, and that a combination of prayer and meditation would probably produce the best results, but I've never tried the meditation part.
Do you know God?
Newguy?
NoEda?
Deadbeat?
Dad1?
Pnelson?
Joeseph Smith?
Jim Jones?
Which one is right?
And was God lieing to the others?
I don't know God, but believe it is possible for people to know of his existence if he exists. No one can know if he does not, but it seems more than likely that some people know if he does. I believe unless he gives someone the equivalent of Saul's Damascus Highway people would have to approach him through prayer, and that a combination of prayer and meditation would probably produce the best results, but I've never tried the meditation part.
QUOTE (Fior+Jun 5 2009, 12:16 PM)
Hi,
Sorry to interrupt, but perhaps their intepretation is wrong (more like completely illogical). But each to their own i guess.
Thank you.
The main purpose of religions appears to be to get people to establish a relationship with God, regardless of what they call him or what they think about him. Those sort of details don't matter much anyway, since if any of us ever are going to get a decent idea what he's like its probably not going to happen until after we're dead. The religions and books are more like signs pointing which direction to head than they are like documentaries.
Sorry to interrupt, but perhaps their intepretation is wrong (more like completely illogical). But each to their own i guess.
Thank you.
The main purpose of religions appears to be to get people to establish a relationship with God, regardless of what they call him or what they think about him. Those sort of details don't matter much anyway, since if any of us ever are going to get a decent idea what he's like its probably not going to happen until after we're dead. The religions and books are more like signs pointing which direction to head than they are like documentaries.
QUOTE (gmilam+Jun 4 2009, 05:56 PM)
Would answering your own question with more questions be a sign of insanity?
Didn't want to offend people and wanted to encourage discussion. Your right that does look pretty bad. I am used to some secularist not understanding me (I'm used to bad verbal arguments)
Didn't want to offend people and wanted to encourage discussion. Your right that does look pretty bad. I am used to some secularist not understanding me (I'm used to bad verbal arguments)
QUOTE (Fior+Jun 5 2009, 09:41 PM)
Hi nopEda,
Seems very one way only. Its difficult enough to justify his existance, let alone the question of whether he's is knowable or not. I think only the extremist and devouted of christians would ponder on that question because of the way the scriptures are written (and the 'Lord' said: etc etc).
Thank you.
We can try or not try. We get the choice. Is that good or bad? If God did prove his existence then people would still have resentments, but the whole thing would be a lot different if God proved that he exists.
Seems very one way only. Its difficult enough to justify his existance, let alone the question of whether he's is knowable or not. I think only the extremist and devouted of christians would ponder on that question because of the way the scriptures are written (and the 'Lord' said: etc etc).
Thank you.
We can try or not try. We get the choice. Is that good or bad? If God did prove his existence then people would still have resentments, but the whole thing would be a lot different if God proved that he exists.
QUOTE (FatherJFair+Jun 5 2009, 06:44 AM)
God intended us to know him. That is why he left us the Holy Scripture's.
If you need or seek guidance, i will be gladly at my uttermost to help you.
Father John Fair.
Divine inspiration is a hilarious answer coming from someone of your ilk. The writers of your "Holy Sciptures" were influenced by a number of things for their "inspiration". They were motivated to document their cult and give it a basis for continuance. One oft relied upon/quoted book was written by an aging madman living in a cave filled with noxious gases and a nearby supply of magic mushrooms.
If you need or seek guidance, i will be gladly at my uttermost to help you.
Father John Fair.
Divine inspiration is a hilarious answer coming from someone of your ilk. The writers of your "Holy Sciptures" were influenced by a number of things for their "inspiration". They were motivated to document their cult and give it a basis for continuance. One oft relied upon/quoted book was written by an aging madman living in a cave filled with noxious gases and a nearby supply of magic mushrooms.
[I] As I note @ the thread the ignostic-Ockham, He has no meaning, just a filler for ignorance or else a needless redundancy, Alister McGrath, Dawkins's nemesis notwithstanding.
When theists insist that He is unknowable, they affirm then that He is a mystery, putatively the Ultimate Explanation and the Sufficient Reason, thereby affirming that that is so much obscurantism as that would -be explanation and reason.
Prof. Irwin Corey makes sense. This unknowability makes nonsense.
Faith cannot affirm the unknowable.
When theists insist that He is unknowable, they affirm then that He is a mystery, putatively the Ultimate Explanation and the Sufficient Reason, thereby affirming that that is so much obscurantism as that would -be explanation and reason.
Prof. Irwin Corey makes sense. This unknowability makes nonsense.
Faith cannot affirm the unknowable.
Honestly just look around you, do you see any presence of 'God'? There is no such thing. There is you and you only.
__
"Kabbalah does not let us live our lives in the dust, but elevates our mind to the height of knowledge." Johannes Reuchlin
__
"Kabbalah does not let us live our lives in the dust, but elevates our mind to the height of knowledge." Johannes Reuchlin
QUOTE (nopEda+Jun 5 2009, 10:54 AM)
The main purpose of religions appears to be to get people to establish a relationship with God
Wrong!
The main purpose of religion is to impose a controlling influence on the masses by those in power (the Leaders of the religion).
An individuals own spirituality is not dependent on religion. Religions are simply a tool used to control the masses through the use of fear (fear of hell, god fearing...) misdirection (the infidels, non-believers...) and similar techniques. the Catholic church and Islam are very adept at this technique among others.
The use of suicide bombers, The restriction of birth control in the face of wide-spread AIDs in Africa are just some of the latest examples of religions imposing doctrine over their followers to further their influence over the peoples involved.
If you as an individual want to be spiritual, be spiritual outside of the influence of religions! They are dangerous and likely to be the downfall of the human race.
FGG
Wrong!
The main purpose of religion is to impose a controlling influence on the masses by those in power (the Leaders of the religion).
An individuals own spirituality is not dependent on religion. Religions are simply a tool used to control the masses through the use of fear (fear of hell, god fearing...) misdirection (the infidels, non-believers...) and similar techniques. the Catholic church and Islam are very adept at this technique among others.
The use of suicide bombers, The restriction of birth control in the face of wide-spread AIDs in Africa are just some of the latest examples of religions imposing doctrine over their followers to further their influence over the peoples involved.
If you as an individual want to be spiritual, be spiritual outside of the influence of religions! They are dangerous and likely to be the downfall of the human race.
FGG
In a way, I know God on a personal level. He has shown himself to me in a myriad of subtle ways. This is something anyone with good faith can see.
Take Care
Dale Vibert.
Take Care
Dale Vibert.
QUOTE (D.Vibert+Jul 19 2009, 09:13 AM)
In a way, I know God on a personal level. He has shown himself to me in a myriad of subtle ways. This is something anyone with good faith can see.
Take Care
Dale Vibert.
Yeah, I know what you mean. Virtually everyone I know would say that Thor does not exist yet every time it thunders, I know he is there.
Take Care
Dale Vibert.
Yeah, I know what you mean. Virtually everyone I know would say that Thor does not exist yet every time it thunders, I know he is there.
QUOTE (D.Vibert+Jul 19 2009, 03:13 AM)
In a way, I know God on a personal level. He has shown himself to me in a myriad of subtle ways. This is something anyone with good faith can see.
Take Care
Dale Vibert.
Therein lies the fallacy. You cannot "know god" without faith in the unknowable.
FGG
Take Care
Dale Vibert.
Therein lies the fallacy. You cannot "know god" without faith in the unknowable.
FGG
QUOTE (FGG+Jul 19 2009, 08:33 PM)
Therein lies the fallacy. You cannot "know god" without faith in the unknowable.
FGG
God can let people know that he does exist, and then they can know it. In contrast to that no one can ever know that God does not exist. Believing in God's non-existence is an act of pure faith, and that's ALL it can EVER be.
Is that fact because God made it that way 
? No one can know ...... What we do know though is that strong atheism is as faith dependant a religious belief as any other, that much is certain 
.
FGG
God can let people know that he does exist, and then they can know it. In contrast to that no one can ever know that God does not exist. Believing in God's non-existence is an act of pure faith, and that's ALL it can EVER be.
Is that fact because God made it that way ? No one can know ...... What we do know though is that strong atheism is as faith dependant a religious belief as any other, that much is certain .
QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 20 2009, 09:31 AM)
God can let people know that he does exist, and then they can know it. In contrast to that no one can ever know that God does not exist. Believing in God's non-existence is an act of pure faith, and that's ALL it can EVER be. Is that fact because God made it that way ? No one can know ...... What we do know though is that strong atheism is as faith dependant a religious belief as any other, that much is certain .
Thank you for that statement of profound ignorance.
Faith = belief without seeing.
How is refusing to believe in something that you cannot see an act of faith?
Is that fact because God made it that way ? No one can know ...... What we do know though is that strong atheism is as faith dependant a religious belief as any other, that much is certain . Thank you for that statement of profound ignorance.
Faith = belief without seeing.
How is refusing to believe in something that you cannot see an act of faith?
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Jul 20 2009, 02:38 PM)
QUOTE (nopEda+)
What we do know though is that strong atheism is as faith dependant a religious belief as any other, that much is certain .
.Thank you for that statement of profound ignorance.
I've found that an amusingly high percentage of people who consider themselves to be strong atheists, are also ashamed and in denial of the faith which is required in order for them to be one.
I've found that an amusingly high percentage of people who consider themselves to be strong atheists, are also ashamed and in denial of the faith which is required in order for them to be one.
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+)
Faith = belief
Right. Faith is the degree of confidence a person or animal has that what they believe to be correct, actually is correct.
Right. Faith is the degree of confidence a person or animal has that what they believe to be correct, actually is correct.
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+)
without seeing.
How is refusing to believe in something that you cannot see an act of faith?
The degree of faith a person has that God does not exist, is what determines how strong an atheist the person is or is not. If they have strong faith they are a strong antheist, and if they have no faith they are a weak atheist or an agnostic. I have strong faith that the tooth fairy does not exist, but no faith that God does not exist.
How is refusing to believe in something that you cannot see an act of faith?
The degree of faith a person has that God does not exist, is what determines how strong an atheist the person is or is not. If they have strong faith they are a strong antheist, and if they have no faith they are a weak atheist or an agnostic. I have strong faith that the tooth fairy does not exist, but no faith that God does not exist.
QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 20 2009, 10:36 AM)
I've found that an amusingly high percentage of people who consider themselves to be strong atheists, are also ashamed and in denial of the faith which is required in order for them to be one.
The degree of faith a person has that God does not exist, is what determines how strong an atheist the person is or is not. If they have strong faith they are a strong antheist, and if they have no faith they are a weak atheist or an agnostic. I have strong faith that the tooth fairy does not exist, but no faith that God does not exist.
Wow, way to misquote what I said.
I said:
You can't have faith in skepticism. Faith is a belief based on things which cannot be seen.
If I say: "The Easter Bunny does not exist." This is the same thing as saying "God does not exist."
What makes god better than the Easter Bunny?
The degree of faith a person has that God does not exist, is what determines how strong an atheist the person is or is not. If they have strong faith they are a strong antheist, and if they have no faith they are a weak atheist or an agnostic. I have strong faith that the tooth fairy does not exist, but no faith that God does not exist.
Wow, way to misquote what I said.
I said:
QUOTE
Faith = belief without seeing.
You can't have faith in skepticism. Faith is a belief based on things which cannot be seen.
If I say: "The Easter Bunny does not exist." This is the same thing as saying "God does not exist."
What makes god better than the Easter Bunny?
QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 20 2009, 08:31 AM)
God can let people know that he does exist, and then they can know it. In contrast to that no one can ever know that God does not exist. Believing in God's non-existence is an act of pure faith, and that's ALL it can EVER be. Is that fact because God made it that way ? No one can know ...... What we do know though is that strong atheism is as faith dependant a religious belief as any other, that much is certain .
Just because you cannot prove something does not exist does not improve the chances that it does exist!
FGG
Is that fact because God made it that way ? No one can know ...... What we do know though is that strong atheism is as faith dependant a religious belief as any other, that much is certain .Just because you cannot prove something does not exist does not improve the chances that it does exist!
FGG
QUOTE (FGG+Jul 20 2009, 09:58 PM)
Just because you cannot prove something does not exist does not improve the chances that it does exist!
FGG
That is true. And I don't believe one can absolutely prove a negative. If anything, negative results would seem to imply the greater likelihood of the negative being accurate.
FGG
That is true. And I don't believe one can absolutely prove a negative. If anything, negative results would seem to imply the greater likelihood of the negative being accurate.
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Jul 20 2009, 03:45 PM)
Wow, way to misquote what I said.
Thanks. I supported the honest portion of what you wrote, before the dishonest twist you threw in there after it 
.
Thanks. I supported the honest portion of what you wrote
, before the dishonest twist you threw in there after it .QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+)
I said:
You can't have faith in skepticism. Faith is a belief based on things which cannot be seen.
Faith is the degree of confidence a person or animal has that something they believe to be correct, is correct. It doesn't matter whether or not it can be seen, smelled, felt, heard, or tasted. You tried to put a dishonest restriction on the idea for whatever reason. Why did you try that btw, do you even know?
You can't have faith in skepticism. Faith is a belief based on things which cannot be seen.
Faith is the degree of confidence a person or animal has that something they believe to be correct, is correct. It doesn't matter whether or not it can be seen, smelled, felt, heard, or tasted. You tried to put a dishonest restriction on the idea for whatever reason. Why did you try that btw, do you even know?
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+)
If I say: "The Easter Bunny does not exist." This is the same thing as saying "God does not exist."
What makes god better than the Easter Bunny?
Some of us know the EB is a lie, but no one could know that God does not exist if he doesn't. If people who put their faith in that guess are correct then they've just made the right guess, but it's not like they can truly "learn" that God does not exist as we learn that the EB does not.
What makes god better than the Easter Bunny?
Some of us know the EB is a lie, but no one could know that God does not exist if he doesn't. If people who put their faith in that guess are correct then they've just made the right guess, but it's not like they can truly "learn" that God does not exist as we learn that the EB does not.
QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 21 2009, 11:01 AM)
Faith is the degree of confidence a person or animal has that something they believe to be correct, is correct. It doesn't matter whether or not it can be seen, smelled, felt, heard, or tasted. You tried to put a dishonest restriction on the idea for whatever reason. Why did you try that btw, do you even know?
Uhhh, where are you getting your definitions?
Faith:
Dictionary Link
Who's the dishonest one now?
Dictionary Link
Who's the dishonest one now?
Some of us know the EB is a lie, but no one could know that God does not exist if he doesn't. If people who put their faith in that guess are correct then they've just made the right guess, but it's not like they can truly "learn" that God does not exist as we learn that the EB does not.
The difference is that I have "learned" that god is a lie, just like the Easter bunny. Both god and the Easter bunny could still exist, but I know that there is no basis to argue that they do exist.
The difference is that I have "learned" that god is a lie, just like the Easter bunny. Both god and the Easter bunny could still exist, but I know that there is no basis to argue that they do exist.
Do you recognize a difference between "not believing" and "believing not"?
Uhhh, where are you getting your definitions?
Faith:
QUOTE
Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.
Dictionary Link
Who's the dishonest one now?
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. |
Dictionary Link
Who's the dishonest one now?
Some of us know the EB is a lie, but no one could know that God does not exist if he doesn't. If people who put their faith in that guess are correct then they've just made the right guess, but it's not like they can truly "learn" that God does not exist as we learn that the EB does not.
The difference is that I have "learned" that god is a lie, just like the Easter bunny. Both god and the Easter bunny could still exist, but I know that there is no basis to argue that they do exist.
Christians like to preach about faith, especially when it comers to ideas of evolution vs. creationism.
A former pastor of mine once told me "Faith is belief despite the absence of evidence. Delusion is belief despite the presence of evidence."
So which is it: Faith, or delusion?
P.S. Yes, he was talking about creationists.
A former pastor of mine once told me "Faith is belief despite the absence of evidence. Delusion is belief despite the presence of evidence."
So which is it: Faith, or delusion?
P.S. Yes, he was talking about creationists.
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Jul 21 2009, 04:11 PM)
The difference is that I have "learned" that god is a lie, just like the Easter bunny. Both god and the Easter bunny could still exist, but I know that there is no basis to argue that they do exist.
Do you recognize a difference between "not believing" and "believing not"?
QUOTE (buttershug+Jul 21 2009, 11:42 AM)
Do you recognize a difference between "not believing" and "believing not"?
I do, but I waver between the two.
My logic is that god does not exist until it is proven to exist.
I do, but I waver between the two.
My logic is that god does not exist until it is proven to exist.
QUOTE (buttershug+Jul 21 2009, 04:42 PM)
Do you recognize a difference between "not believing" and "believing not"?
Please explain.
Please explain.
QUOTE (Derek1148+Jul 21 2009, 01:58 PM)
Please explain.
The former is the refusal to accept a positive assertion, such as "God exists."
The latter is the holding of the negative form of the same assertion, such as "God does not exist."
The former is a skeptical position (it allows the possibility of being wrong), the latter a pseudo-skeptical position (it makes it's own assertion, without acknowledging the possibility of being wrong.
The former is the refusal to accept a positive assertion, such as "God exists."
The latter is the holding of the negative form of the same assertion, such as "God does not exist."
The former is a skeptical position (it allows the possibility of being wrong), the latter a pseudo-skeptical position (it makes it's own assertion, without acknowledging the possibility of being wrong.
QUOTE (MjolnirPants+Jul 21 2009, 07:12 PM)
The former is the refusal to accept a positive assertion, such as "God exists."
That includes weak atheism, which involves no faith.
That includes weak atheism, which involves no faith.
QUOTE (MjolnirPants+)
The latter is the holding of the negative form of the same assertion, such as "God does not exist."
That includes strong atheism, which requires some degree of faith.
That includes strong atheism, which requires some degree of faith.
QUOTE (MjolnirPants+)
The former is a skeptical position (it allows the possibility of being wrong), the latter a pseudo-skeptical position (it makes it's own assertion, without acknowledging the possibility of being wrong.
It requires faith like any other religious belief. The degree of faith a person has that God does not exist is what determines how strong an atheist the person is or is not.
It requires faith like any other religious belief. The degree of faith a person has that God does not exist is what determines how strong an atheist the person is or is not.
QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 21 2009, 02:16 PM)
That includes weak atheism, which involves no faith.
It requires faith like any other religious belief. The degree of faith a person has that God does not exist is what determines how strong an atheist the person is or is not.
Faith (the religious type) is not part of my belief. I'm a strong Atheist as I actively believe that it does not exist in the context that the religious portray. I've examined both sides and since there is a total lack of evidence to support the existence of a supernatural omnipotent god, I do not believe it exists.
The FAITH argument is always thrown out there by the religious in an attempt to weaken the position of non-believers and place us on a more level playing field as the religious seem to be oblivious to the fact that by injecting faith into the atheist position to weaken it, they are admitting that their own position is on a weak footing. The fact that there exists no evidence to support the existence of god requires that you have faith in order to believe. There can be no belief without faith. The lack of belief does not require religious style faith.
FGG
It requires faith like any other religious belief. The degree of faith a person has that God does not exist is what determines how strong an atheist the person is or is not.
Faith (the religious type) is not part of my belief. I'm a strong Atheist as I actively believe that it does not exist in the context that the religious portray. I've examined both sides and since there is a total lack of evidence to support the existence of a supernatural omnipotent god, I do not believe it exists.
The FAITH argument is always thrown out there by the religious in an attempt to weaken the position of non-believers and place us on a more level playing field as the religious seem to be oblivious to the fact that by injecting faith into the atheist position to weaken it, they are admitting that their own position is on a weak footing. The fact that there exists no evidence to support the existence of god requires that you have faith in order to believe. There can be no belief without faith. The lack of belief does not require religious style faith.
FGG
QUOTE (FGG+Jul 21 2009, 09:23 PM)
Faith (the religious type) is not part of my belief. I'm a strong Atheist as I actively believe that it does not exist in the context that the religious portray. I've examined both sides and since there is a total lack of evidence to support the existence of a supernatural omnipotent god, I do not believe it exists.
The amount of faith you have that you are correct is what determines how strong an atheist you are, or you are not.
The amount of faith you have that you are correct is what determines how strong an atheist you are, or you are not.
QUOTE (FGG+)
The FAITH argument is always thrown out there by the religious in an attempt to weaken the position of non-believers and place us on a more level playing field
You ARE on the same level.
It's amusing that you actually complained because people are pointing out your faith in your own belief, is in no way superior to faith in other religious beliefs. Yours is not at all superior.
You ARE on the same level.
It's amusing that you actually complained because people are pointing out your faith in your own belief, is in no way superior to faith in other religious beliefs. Yours is not at all superior.
QUOTE (FGG+)
There can be no belief without faith. The lack of belief does not require religious style faith.
Faith is faith, regardless of what it's in. Faith is not involved in weak atheism but it is a necessary part of strong atheism, and the faith of strong atheists is not somehow magically superior to the faith of any other religious beliefs.
Faith is faith, regardless of what it's in. Faith is not involved in weak atheism but it is a necessary part of strong atheism, and the faith of strong atheists is not somehow magically superior to the faith of any other religious beliefs.
QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 22 2009, 03:21 PM)
The amount of faith you have that you are correct is what determines how strong an atheist you are, or you are not.
Too bad, you're wrong.
Too bad, still wrong.
Too bad, still wrong.
It's amusing that you actually complained because people are pointing out your faith in your own belief, is in no way superior to faith in other religious beliefs. Yours is not at all superior.
Too bad, wrong.
Nope, still wrong. Read a dictionary retard.
Nope, still wrong. Read a dictionary retard.
Excuse me?
nopEda and a dictionary?
The two never intersect.
Too bad, you're wrong.
QUOTE
You ARE on the same level.
Too bad, still wrong.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| You ARE on the same level. |
Too bad, still wrong.
It's amusing that you actually complained because people are pointing out your faith in your own belief, is in no way superior to faith in other religious beliefs. Yours is not at all superior.
Too bad, wrong.
QUOTE
Faith is faith, regardless of what it's in. Faith is not involved in weak atheism but it is a necessary part of strong atheism, and the faith of strong atheists is not somehow magically superior to the faith of any other religious beliefs.
Nope, still wrong. Read a dictionary retard.
QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 22 2009, 02:21 PM)
The amount of faith you have that you are correct is what determines how strong an atheist you are, or you are not.
Faith is faith, regardless of what it's in. Faith is not involved in weak atheism but it is a necessary part of strong atheism, and the faith of strong atheists is not somehow magically superior to the faith of any other religious beliefs.
Religious style faith does not require any evidence to support the belief that it brings. In fact the lack of evidence is a cornerstone of the faithful. Its testing the faithful.
There is no faith in my religious position! It is based on the evidence at hand! My position can change due to new evidence being brought forward. Religious faith will not change under any circumstances as long they are to remain faithful!
FGG
Faith is faith, regardless of what it's in. Faith is not involved in weak atheism but it is a necessary part of strong atheism, and the faith of strong atheists is not somehow magically superior to the faith of any other religious beliefs.
Religious style faith does not require any evidence to support the belief that it brings. In fact the lack of evidence is a cornerstone of the faithful. Its testing the faithful.
There is no faith in my religious position! It is based on the evidence at hand! My position can change due to new evidence being brought forward. Religious faith will not change under any circumstances as long they are to remain faithful!
FGG
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Jul 22 2009, 03:26 PM)
Nope, still wrong. Read a dictionary retard.
Excuse me?
nopEda and a dictionary?
The two never intersect.
QUOTE (nopEda+)
Faith is faith, regardless of what it's in. Faith is not involved in weak atheism but it is a necessary part of strong atheism, and the faith of strong atheists is not somehow magically superior to the faith of any other religious beliefs.
1+2=3
Do this require faith?
1+2=3
Do this require faith?
nopEda
The conclusion that god does not exist is based on evidence, logic and reason, it is VASTLY superior to uninformed superstitious belief(acceptance without evidence)in the supernatural.
Grumpy
QUOTE
the faith of strong atheists is not somehow magically superior to the faith of any other religious beliefs.
The conclusion that god does not exist is based on evidence, logic and reason, it is VASTLY superior to uninformed superstitious belief(acceptance without evidence)in the supernatural.
Grumpy
QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 21 2009, 03:16 PM)
That includes weak atheism, which involves no faith.
Say it with me jerkoff... "Agnosticism."
Let's try it again, dumbass... "Agnosticism."
Still having trouble? Let me spell it phonetically (that means "spelled the way it's pronounced")... Ahg-Nos-Tih-Siz-Em.
Now try it on your own....
Bullshit. There is no faith involved, only a logical fallacy. Faith != Logical Fallacy.
Bullshit. There is no faith involved, only a logical fallacy. Faith != Logical Fallacy.
The degree of faith a person has that God does not exist is what determines how strong an atheist the person is or is not.
There is absolutely no evidence for the existence of god. Therefore, one needs no faith to postulate god's non-existence, nor even to insist on god's non-existence. The only thing required is a logical fallacy.
Say it with me jerkoff... "Agnosticism."
Let's try it again, dumbass... "Agnosticism."
Still having trouble? Let me spell it phonetically (that means "spelled the way it's pronounced")... Ahg-Nos-Tih-Siz-Em.
Now try it on your own....
QUOTE
It requires faith like any other religious belief.
Bullshit. There is no faith involved, only a logical fallacy. Faith != Logical Fallacy.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| It requires faith like any other religious belief. |
Bullshit. There is no faith involved, only a logical fallacy. Faith != Logical Fallacy.
The degree of faith a person has that God does not exist is what determines how strong an atheist the person is or is not.
There is absolutely no evidence for the existence of god. Therefore, one needs no faith to postulate god's non-existence, nor even to insist on god's non-existence. The only thing required is a logical fallacy.
QUOTE (MjolnirPants+Jul 23 2009, 12:08 AM)
Say it with me jerkoff... "Agnosticism."
Let's try it again, dumbass... "Agnosticism."
Still having trouble? Let me spell it phonetically (that means "spelled the way it's pronounced")... Ahg-Nos-Tih-Siz-Em.
He can't get past two possibilities.
If he does then he does not have a dichotomy and gets lost.
Let's try it again, dumbass... "Agnosticism."
Still having trouble? Let me spell it phonetically (that means "spelled the way it's pronounced")... Ahg-Nos-Tih-Siz-Em.
He can't get past two possibilities.
If he does then he does not have a dichotomy and gets lost.
QUOTE (buttershug+Jul 22 2009, 07:36 PM)
He can't get past two possibilities.
If he does then he does not have a dichotomy and gets lost.
What are you saying here?!?! NopEdals can't get past his own, single interpretation of anything...
He's just another idiot theists insisting that atheism is a religion, even if he won't just come right out and say it.
This always bugs the living crap out of me, because I'm a theist and I see absolutely no reason why atheism must be a religion. You can't simply chalk it up to some sort of bias, because if it were a simple bias, I'd have it as well. Yet I don't. Antitheism (otherwise known as 'strong atheism') requires no faith, merely the application of a logical fallacy (the is-ought problem) through reasoning that since there is no evidence for god's existence, there ought to be no god.
The worst part of all is that there are very few people who actually qualify as antitheists. It's just that those tend to be the most vocal sort of atheists on the subject of god's existence. I don't think anyone here would insist that there absolutely, without doubt is no god. I'm fairly certain that even the strongest atheist here would acknowledge that there's a possibility that they could be wrong. Most atheists do, because most people come to atheism through knowledge of methodological naturalism, and so abstain from pseudoskeptical beliefs.
If he does then he does not have a dichotomy and gets lost.
What are you saying here?!?! NopEdals can't get past his own, single interpretation of anything...
He's just another idiot theists insisting that atheism is a religion, even if he won't just come right out and say it.
This always bugs the living crap out of me, because I'm a theist and I see absolutely no reason why atheism must be a religion. You can't simply chalk it up to some sort of bias, because if it were a simple bias, I'd have it as well. Yet I don't. Antitheism (otherwise known as 'strong atheism') requires no faith, merely the application of a logical fallacy (the is-ought problem) through reasoning that since there is no evidence for god's existence, there ought to be no god.
The worst part of all is that there are very few people who actually qualify as antitheists. It's just that those tend to be the most vocal sort of atheists on the subject of god's existence. I don't think anyone here would insist that there absolutely, without doubt is no god. I'm fairly certain that even the strongest atheist here would acknowledge that there's a possibility that they could be wrong. Most atheists do, because most people come to atheism through knowledge of methodological naturalism, and so abstain from pseudoskeptical beliefs.
He can't get past his own single interpretation because of dichotomies.
He has his belief and believes it must be true because the "alternative" can't be.
And you haven't talked to the atheists I have. Somehow I helped turn one into a lawyer I argued with him so much.
In fact I've argued with Atheists that were as strident and certain as Dad1.
He has his belief and believes it must be true because the "alternative" can't be.
And you haven't talked to the atheists I have. Somehow I helped turn one into a lawyer I argued with him so much.
In fact I've argued with Atheists that were as strident and certain as Dad1.
QUOTE (vkamath+Jul 22 2009, 10:04 PM)
QUOTE (nopEda+)
Faith is faith, regardless of what it's in. Faith is not involved in weak atheism but it is a necessary part of strong atheism, and the faith of strong atheists is not somehow magically superior to the faith of any other religious beliefs.
1+2=3
Do this require faith?
You have some degree of faith that it's correct. I have a very high degree of faith that it's correct, to the point of believing it.
+-->
1+2=3
Do this require faith?
You have some degree of faith that it's correct. I have a very high degree of faith that it's correct, to the point of believing it
.
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Jul 22 2009, 08:26 PM)
+-->QUOTE (nopEda pointed out +)
+)You ARE on the same level.
Religious believers can only argue their positions on the basis of belief. So they have to level the playing field by making EVERYTHING a 'belief'. Knowing doesn't occur in their worldview. Fact has no relevance to them.
Religious believers can only argue their positions on the basis of belief. So they have to level the playing field by making EVERYTHING a 'belief'. Knowing doesn't occur in their worldview. Fact has no relevance to them.
What is it you think you know? Do you think you "know" that God does not exist? If so, how do you think you found out?
What is it you think you know? Do you think you "know" that God does not exist? If so, how do you think you found out?
Do you know 1+2=3?
I do.
What is it you think you know? Do you think you "know" that God does not exist? If so, how do you think you found out?
As I have said before, I see no evidence that God exists.
The postulated diety is not necessary for the universe to exist and function. What I know is that physics is both necessary and sufficient. No supernatural intervention required.
What is it you think you know? Do you think you "know" that God does not exist? If so, how do you think you found out?
I'll tell you what I know and how I know it...
1. I know you're an idiot. I know because I've read your posts.
2. I know there is no evidence of the existence of god. I know because I am well read, well educated, intelligent and because there has never been any reputable claim to the presentation of any evidence of the existence of god.
3. I know that if god does exist, it is certainly not an alien. I know because I know and understand the definition of god.
4. I know the proper meaning of the word faith. I know because I am intelligent enough to understand it and because I have actually read and understood the definition of the word. Also, because I have seen firsthand the difference between faith and knowledge.
5. I know that you do not understand the meaning of the words "god," "faith," or "realistic". I know because I know the meaning of the words, and I have seen you misuse them.
6. I know that you cannot admit to being wrong. I know because I have seen you presented with numerous opportunities to do so, yet you have always failed.
7. I know you don't understand basic logic or mathematics. I know because I have seen you misuse them both.
Too bad, you're wrong.
It's still hilarious to see someone try to deny it so blatantly. You sound just like a Southern Baptist who--just like you--all think that their particular faith is something special like you do....
It's still hilarious to see someone try to deny it so blatantly. You sound just like a Southern Baptist who--just like you--all think that their particular faith is something special like you do
....QUOTE (FGG+Jul 22 2009, 09:08 PM)
There is no faith in my religious position!
Then you're not a strong atheist. You could be a weak atheist or an agnostic, but not a strong atheist.
Then you're not a strong atheist. You could be a weak atheist or an agnostic, but not a strong atheist.
QUOTE (MjolnirPants+Jul 23 2009, 12:54 AM)
He's just another idiot theists insisting that atheism is a religion
It's obviously a religious belief, you poor idiot.
It's obviously a religious belief, you poor idiot.
He's just another idiot theists insisting that atheism is a religion
He 'believes', and cannot imagine relating to the universe in any other way.
He 'believes', and cannot imagine relating to the universe in any other way.
QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 22 2009, 08:55 PM)
Then you're not a strong atheist. You could be a weak atheist or an agnostic, but not a strong atheist.
My position is that god DNE! Active denial of its existence. If you call that weak atheism then so be it.
FGG
My position is that god DNE! Active denial of its existence. If you call that weak atheism then so be it.
FGG
QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 22 2009, 08:59 PM)
It's obviously a religious belief, you poor idiot.
It is not a religious belief! It is a lack thereof!
Which of the tenets of a religion is applicable to atheism. Can you do this? Or as I suspect you are just full of hot air.
FGG
It is not a religious belief! It is a lack thereof!
Which of the tenets of a religion is applicable to atheism. Can you do this? Or as I suspect you are just full of hot air.
FGG
QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 22 2009, 09:59 PM)
It's obviously a religious belief, you poor idiot.
Can I spot 'em or what?
Can I spot 'em or what?
QUOTE
It's obviously a religious belief, you poor idiot.
Religious believers can only argue their positions on the basis of belief. So they have to level the playing field by making EVERYTHING a 'belief'. Knowing doesn't occur in their worldview. Fact has no relevance to them.
QUOTE (AlexG+Jul 22 2009, 11:21 PM)
Religious believers can only argue their positions on the basis of belief. So they have to level the playing field by making EVERYTHING a 'belief'. Knowing doesn't occur in their worldview. Fact has no relevance to them.
Nor evidence, or reason...
Or even the definition of words in many cases, one of which is evinced here.
Nor evidence, or reason...
Or even the definition of words in many cases, one of which is evinced here.
-never mind-
QUOTE (AlexG+Jul 23 2009, 04:21 AM)
Religious believers can only argue their positions on the basis of belief. So they have to level the playing field by making EVERYTHING a 'belief'. Knowing doesn't occur in their worldview. Fact has no relevance to them.
What is it you think you know? Do you think you "know" that God does not exist?
If so, how do you think you found out?
QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 23 2009, 11:38 PM)
What is it you think you know? Do you think you "know" that God does not exist?
If so, how do you think you found out? Do you know 1+2=3?
I do.
QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 23 2009, 01:08 PM)
What is it you think you know? Do you think you "know" that God does not exist?
If so, how do you think you found out? As I have said before, I see no evidence that God exists.
The postulated diety is not necessary for the universe to exist and function. What I know is that physics is both necessary and sufficient. No supernatural intervention required.
QUOTE (FGG+Jul 23 2009, 03:46 AM)
My position is that god DNE! Active denial of its existence. If you call that weak atheism then so be it.
FGG
If you believe God doesn't exist then the degree of faith you have that he does not is what determines how strong an atheist you are. If you don't have a belief then you have nothing to have faith in, and that would make you a weak atheist or an agnostic. If you just don't have a belief then you're a weak atheist. If you don't have a belief about God and feel that no one can know whether he exists or not then you are a strong agnostic. If you don't have a belief about God but feel that if he does exist some some people could know it then you are a weak agnostic. That's what I am.
FGG
If you believe God doesn't exist then the degree of faith you have that he does not is what determines how strong an atheist you are. If you don't have a belief then you have nothing to have faith in, and that would make you a weak atheist or an agnostic. If you just don't have a belief then you're a weak atheist. If you don't have a belief about God and feel that no one can know whether he exists or not then you are a strong agnostic. If you don't have a belief about God but feel that if he does exist some some people could know it then you are a weak agnostic. That's what I am.
QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 23 2009, 01:08 PM)
What is it you think you know? Do you think you "know" that God does not exist?
If so, how do you think you found out? I'll tell you what I know and how I know it...
1. I know you're an idiot. I know because I've read your posts.
2. I know there is no evidence of the existence of god. I know because I am well read, well educated, intelligent and because there has never been any reputable claim to the presentation of any evidence of the existence of god.
3. I know that if god does exist, it is certainly not an alien. I know because I know and understand the definition of god.
4. I know the proper meaning of the word faith. I know because I am intelligent enough to understand it and because I have actually read and understood the definition of the word. Also, because I have seen firsthand the difference between faith and knowledge.
5. I know that you do not understand the meaning of the words "god," "faith," or "realistic". I know because I know the meaning of the words, and I have seen you misuse them.
6. I know that you cannot admit to being wrong. I know because I have seen you presented with numerous opportunities to do so, yet you have always failed.
7. I know you don't understand basic logic or mathematics. I know because I have seen you misuse them both.
QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 23 2009, 12:17 PM)
If you believe God doesn't exist then the degree of faith you have that he does not is what determines how strong an atheist you are. If you don't have a belief then you have nothing to have faith in, and that would make you a weak atheist or an agnostic. If you just don't have a belief then you're a weak atheist. If you don't have a belief about God and feel that no one can know whether he exists or not then you are a strong agnostic. If you don't have a belief about God but feel that if he does exist some some people could know it then you are a weak agnostic. That's what I am.
There's is no faith in my belief! It is based on the evidence at hand. The only faith needed is to believe in something that has nothing to support it.
FGG
There's is no faith in my belief! It is based on the evidence at hand. The only faith needed is to believe in something that has nothing to support it.
FGG
QUOTE (FGG+Jul 23 2009, 07:13 PM)
There's is no faith in my belief!
Then you're not a strong atheist.
Then you're not a strong atheist.
QUOTE (FGG+)
It is based on the evidence at hand.
Everyone's is. The degree of faith you have or don't have that your guess is correct is what determines whether you're a strong atheist, weak atheist, agnostic or believer that God does exist.
Everyone's is. The degree of faith you have or don't have that your guess is correct is what determines whether you're a strong atheist, weak atheist, agnostic or believer that God does exist.
QUOTE (TardyPants+Jul 23 2009, 06:17 PM)
I'll tell you what I know and how I know it...
. . .
2. I know there is no evidence of the existence of god. I know because I am well read
. . .
2. I know there is no evidence of the existence of god. I know because I am well read
QUOTE (MjolnirPants+)
3. I know that if god does exist, it is certainly not an alien.
How do you think he is native to a planet that didn't even exist yet when he came into existence ?
How do you think he is native to a planet that didn't even exist yet when he came into existence
? QUOTE (MjolnirPants+)
I know because I know and understand the definition of god.
Which definition(s) of God claim or even suggest that he's a native of Earth ?
Which definition(s) of God claim or even suggest that he's a native of Earth
?QUOTE (MjolnirPants+)
6. I know that you cannot admit to being wrong. I know because I have seen you presented with numerous opportunities to do so, yet you have always failed.
I mean:
That's because when the "opportunities" have been presented, there has been no reason for me to believe that I was actually wrong
.
I mean:
That's because when the "opportunities" have been presented, there has been no reason for me to believe that I was actually wrong
.QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 26 2009, 09:46 AM)
Then you're not a strong atheist.
Are you a strong, or just a moderate retard?
Nope, you just believe what people tell you to believe. Evidence, hahahhaha. You wouldn't know what evidence is if it slapped you in the face and called you mama.
Are you a strong, or just a moderate retard?
QUOTE
Everyone's is. The degree of faith you have or don't have that your guess is correct is what determines whether you're a strong atheist, weak atheist, agnostic or believer that God does exist.
Nope, you just believe what people tell you to believe. Evidence, hahahhaha. You wouldn't know what evidence is if it slapped you in the face and called you mama.
QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 26 2009, 08:46 AM)
Then you're not a strong atheist.
QUOTE (FGG+)
It is based on the evidence at hand.
Everyone's is. The degree of faith you have or don't have that your guess is correct is what determines whether you're a strong atheist, weak atheist, agnostic or believer that God does exist.
No, The religious don't believe based on physical evidence! They believe based on emotional desire.
There is no real logic in there process of arriving at a conclusion that god exists. They use (il)logic that is driven by an emotional need to belong to a greater divine plan... Show me the evidence used by the religious to conclude that god exists?
FGG
Everyone's is. The degree of faith you have or don't have that your guess is correct is what determines whether you're a strong atheist, weak atheist, agnostic or believer that God does exist.
No, The religious don't believe based on physical evidence! They believe based on emotional desire.
There is no real logic in there process of arriving at a conclusion that god exists. They use (il)logic that is driven by an emotional need to belong to a greater divine plan... Show me the evidence used by the religious to conclude that god exists?
FGG
QUOTE (FGG+Jul 26 2009, 03:50 PM)
QUOTE (nopEda pointed out+)
Everyone's is. The degree of faith you have or don't have that your guess is correct is what determines whether you're a strong atheist, weak atheist, agnostic or believer that God does exist.
No,
Yes, and your denial won't make it go away.
No,
Yes, and your denial won't make it go away.
QUOTE (FGG+)
The religious don't believe based on physical evidence!
The things that humans have done is evidence of what superior beings could do especially given BILLIONS of years to develop.
The things that humans have done is evidence of what superior beings could do especially given BILLIONS of years to develop.
QUOTE (FGG+)
They believe based on emotional desire.
Strong atheists believe based on emotional desire too. That won't change if you try to deny it either.
Strong atheists believe based on emotional desire too. That won't change if you try to deny it either.
QUOTE (FGG+)
There is no real logic in there process of arriving at a conclusion that god exists. They use (il)logic that is driven by an emotional need to belong to a greater divine plan... Show me the evidence used by the religious to conclude that god exists?
It varies from one person to another. The fact that humans are advanced so much more than any other creatures is evidence to me.
It varies from one person to another. The fact that humans are advanced so much more than any other creatures is evidence to me.
QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 26 2009, 05:28 PM)
Yes, and your denial won't make it go away.
Can you get any more stupid?
Wow, I guess you can. So you automatically assume that we're superior? You confirm my theory, you are one arrogant retard.
Wow, I guess you can. So you automatically assume that we're superior? You confirm my theory, you are one arrogant retard.
Strong atheists believe based on emotional desire too. That won't change if you try to deny it either.
Obviously you don't know any strong atheists. Way to talk out of your ***.
Because your brain is the size of a walnut, and you can't comprehend that the word "advanced" does not describe the human species.
Do you think it was god's masterpiece to create a species that would utterly devastate Earth and hundreds of other species in the first 10,000 years of civilization?
Your 'proof' of god shows what a buffoon you really are.
Can you get any more stupid?
QUOTE
The things that humans have done is evidence of what superior beings could do especially given BILLIONS of years to develop.
Wow, I guess you can. So you automatically assume that we're superior? You confirm my theory, you are one arrogant retard.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| The things that humans have done is evidence of what superior beings could do especially given BILLIONS of years to develop. |
Wow, I guess you can. So you automatically assume that we're superior? You confirm my theory, you are one arrogant retard.
Strong atheists believe based on emotional desire too. That won't change if you try to deny it either.
Obviously you don't know any strong atheists. Way to talk out of your ***.
QUOTE
The fact that humans are advanced so much more than any other creatures is evidence to me.
Because your brain is the size of a walnut, and you can't comprehend that the word "advanced" does not describe the human species.
Do you think it was god's masterpiece to create a species that would utterly devastate Earth and hundreds of other species in the first 10,000 years of civilization?
Your 'proof' of god shows what a buffoon you really are.
QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 26 2009, 10:28 PM)
The fact that humans are advanced so much more than any other creatures is evidence to me.
How so?
What about the wingspan of the Ablatros? It's much larger than other birds. Does that mean it was engineered?
Why is there no fundamental difference between humans and other animals?
How so?
What about the wingspan of the Ablatros? It's much larger than other birds. Does that mean it was engineered?
Why is there no fundamental difference between humans and other animals?
QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 26 2009, 02:59 PM)
Which definition(s) of God claim or even suggest that he's a native of Earth ?
?Any god defined as omnipresent, or pantheistic, would be universally native.
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Jul 26 2009, 11:29 PM)
the word "advanced" does not describe the human species.
Do you think it was god's masterpiece to create a species that would utterly devastate Earth and hundreds of other species in the first 10,000 years of civilization?
If God exists and that's what's happening, then apparently it's part of the plan. It is amusing that you can't even comprehend that much. Considering reasons why is of course far beyond anything you will ever be capable of.
BTW, do you think you truly believe that the Earth is utterly devastated ?
Do you think it was god's masterpiece to create a species that would utterly devastate Earth and hundreds of other species in the first 10,000 years of civilization?
If God exists and that's what's happening, then apparently it's part of the plan.
It is amusing that you can't even comprehend that much. Considering reasons why is of course far beyond anything you will ever be capable of.BTW, do you think you truly believe that the Earth is utterly devastated
?
QUOTE (Capracus+Jul 27 2009, 11:22 AM)
Any god defined as omnipresent, or pantheistic, would be universally native.
Not if he wasn't in that position when he came into existence.
Not if he wasn't in that position when he came into existence.
QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 27 2009, 11:52 AM)
Not if he wasn't in that position when he came into existence.
Great argument.
So long as you have evidence of some mechanism by which a being can become omnipotent and omnipresent...
Dumbass...
Great argument.
So long as you have evidence of some mechanism by which a being can become omnipotent and omnipresent...
Dumbass...
QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 27 2009, 04:52 PM)
Not if he wasn't in that position when he came into existence.
And if he wasn't then he's not God.
But you twist and abuse the word rather than making or using a more accurate word.
And if he wasn't then he's not God.
But you twist and abuse the word rather than making or using a more accurate word.
Is this guy for real? nopEda is too dumb to live.
nopEda,
How do you remember to breathe when you wake up in the morning?
nopEda,
How do you remember to breathe when you wake up in the morning?
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Jul 27 2009, 12:50 PM)
Is this guy for real? nopEda is too dumb to live.
nopEda,
How do you remember to breathe when you wake up in the morning?
He doesn't. How do you think he got so dumb?
nopEda,
How do you remember to breathe when you wake up in the morning?
He doesn't. How do you think he got so dumb?
QUOTE (MjolnirPants+Jul 27 2009, 01:09 PM)
He doesn't. How do you think he got so dumb?
I propose that we take up an ancient Athenian tradition: Ostracism.
Each week/month/whatever we will have a poll on which crank to ban for a month. Nominations will be taken from members that have a positive approval rating. What do you think?
I propose that we take up an ancient Athenian tradition: Ostracism.
Each week/month/whatever we will have a poll on which crank to ban for a month. Nominations will be taken from members that have a positive approval rating. What do you think?
If we all just stop replying to him, he'll eventually go away. Instead, these stupid threads keep going on and on.
QUOTE (AlexG+Jul 27 2009, 01:32 PM)
If we all just stop replying to him, he'll eventually go away. Instead, these stupid threads keep going on and on.
You make a good point. And he's one of the less amusing and more annoying idiots.
You make a good point. And he's one of the less amusing and more annoying idiots.
[SIZE=14]
Pants, we ignostics find Him like a square circle: so as strong atheists, we find no there there. See the thread the ignotist & Occam [ should be the ignostic-Ockham],please . Indeed, arguments for Him fail, again there is no there there, affirming ignosticism [igtheism; theological non-cognitivism].
Oh, we anti-theists, Pew notwithstanding, are on a roll!
Pants, we ignostics find Him like a square circle: so as strong atheists, we find no there there. See the thread the ignotist & Occam [ should be the ignostic-Ockham],please . Indeed, arguments for Him fail, again there is no there there, affirming ignosticism [igtheism; theological non-cognitivism].
Oh, we anti-theists, Pew notwithstanding, are on a roll!
QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 26 2009, 04:28 PM)
Yes, and your denial won't make it go away.
Your affirmation will not make it any more likely!
Your affirmation will not make it any more likely!
QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 26 2009, 04:28 PM)
The things that humans have done is evidence of what superior beings could do especially given BILLIONS of years to develop.
This makes no sense! ????
This makes no sense! ????
QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 26 2009, 04:28 PM)
Strong atheists believe based on emotional desire too. That won't change if you try to deny it either.
I'm a strong atheist and if your were to show me convincing evidence, I'd change!
I'm a strong atheist and if your were to show me convincing evidence, I'd change!
QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 26 2009, 04:28 PM)
It varies from one person to another. The fact that humans are advanced so much more than any other creatures is evidence to me.
All that is evidence of is that we are more advanced! (some might disagree) We are just another species in this plant. Nothing special, except perhaps in our own minds.
We evolved on a very nice planet circling a modest run-of-the-mill star in the out-skirts of a very typical galaxy in the backwater part of the universe. Not exactly the prime location for a chosen people. If we were to kill ourselves off tomorrow, know one else would take notice except perhaps for the astronomer on an alien planet that that noticed the pretty flash of light coming from our planet.
FGG
All that is evidence of is that we are more advanced! (some might disagree) We are just another species in this plant. Nothing special, except perhaps in our own minds.
We evolved on a very nice planet circling a modest run-of-the-mill star in the out-skirts of a very typical galaxy in the backwater part of the universe. Not exactly the prime location for a chosen people. If we were to kill ourselves off tomorrow, know one else would take notice except perhaps for the astronomer on an alien planet that that noticed the pretty flash of light coming from our planet.
FGG
i know god persinaly becouse i know myself im not an evil person but iv don evil things well to me its not so bad but for the bible im pretty doomed
like right befor i was typing this i wan tto to say god was in my pants cuz i thot it was funny but i wanted to be serius for a second lol
eather way u love someone right? any one out there who loves someone even if u hate the world but u love one person an that person loves a person besides u an your parents love you an someone loves your parrents an your freinds are loved by theres an you love your freinds an it goes on an on an on an on
till u get to apoint were u realise everyone is loved by someone an with all that love around i feel like no matter what happens someone will love me
i know it sounds corny but thats how i think so i dont think ill go to hell for wht iv don in physical form nor will i be rewarded but every thing will be fine knowing i ant the only one that will die someday i expect too see ever one there ) even poeple iv met over the internet u know?
like right befor i was typing this i wan tto to say god was in my pants cuz i thot it was funny but i wanted to be serius for a second lol
eather way u love someone right? any one out there who loves someone even if u hate the world but u love one person an that person loves a person besides u an your parents love you an someone loves your parrents an your freinds are loved by theres an you love your freinds an it goes on an on an on an on
till u get to apoint were u realise everyone is loved by someone an with all that love around i feel like no matter what happens someone will love me
i know it sounds corny but thats how i think so i dont think ill go to hell for wht iv don in physical form nor will i be rewarded but every thing will be fine knowing i ant the only one that will die someday i expect too see ever one there ) even poeple iv met over the internet u know?
YES! You sure can know God! He wants a personal relationship with you right here, right now. It's written all over the Bible for pete's sake! It's really easy! Admit that you are a sinner. Believe that Jesus is God's son and he died on the cross for your sins AND ROSE BACK TO LIFE on the third day! And confess your sin and that you want a personal relationship with God. Because he wants to have a personal relationship with YOU[I][U][B]! You can pray this, say it out loud, whatever! He will accept you right where you are because he loves you so! Here's the really important thing, HE DIED FOR YOU! You can't show more love than that!
QUOTE (Alaxir Zoa+Jul 28 2009, 01:18 PM)
YES! You sure can know God! He wants a personal relationship with you right here, right now. It's written all over the Bible for pete's sake! It's really easy! Admit that you are a sinner. Believe that Jesus is God's son and he died on the cross for your sins AND ROSE BACK TO LIFE on the third day! And confess your sin and that you want a personal relationship with God. Because he wants to have a personal relationship with YOU[I][U][B]! You can pray this, say it out loud, whatever! He will accept you right where you are because he loves you so! Here's the really important thing, HE DIED FOR YOU! You can't show more love than that!
I usually try to keep an open mind, but I really can't stand preaching. I doubt you know god, if god even exists. For me, it takes too much of a stretch of logic to believe that there is a god that is able to telepathically talk to every human at once.
Also, your extreme enthusiasm makes it sound like you're in a cult.
I usually try to keep an open mind, but I really can't stand preaching. I doubt you know god, if god even exists. For me, it takes too much of a stretch of logic to believe that there is a god that is able to telepathically talk to every human at once.
Also, your extreme enthusiasm makes it sound like you're in a cult.
QUOTE (gendo+Jul 28 2009, 07:31 AM)
I usually try to keep an open mind, but I really can't stand preaching. I doubt you know god, if god even exists. For me, it takes too much of a stretch of logic to believe that there is a god that is able to telepathically talk to every human at once.
Also, your extreme enthusiasm makes it sound like you're in a cult.
Religions are cults
FGG
Also, your extreme enthusiasm makes it sound like you're in a cult.
Religions are cults
FGG
QUOTE (FGG+Jul 28 2009, 02:20 PM)
Religions are cults
This is obviously not the standard definition. What's the dividing line btw? When does a cult become a religion? $cientology seems to be in the cusp of that difference, though most people would argue that they are a cult. Is it the number of followers? The perceived "wackiness" of their beliefs? At some point, Mormonism graduated from cult to religion. Who knows, maybe there isn't a difference.
This is obviously not the standard definition. What's the dividing line btw? When does a cult become a religion? $cientology seems to be in the cusp of that difference, though most people would argue that they are a cult. Is it the number of followers? The perceived "wackiness" of their beliefs? At some point, Mormonism graduated from cult to religion. Who knows, maybe there isn't a difference.
QUOTE (FGG+)
Also, your extreme enthusiasm makes it sound like you're in a cult.
Alaxir Zoa seems to be a sock
OR
is being sarcastic.
Alaxir Zoa seems to be a sock
OR
is being sarcastic.
QUOTE (FGG+Jul 28 2009, 12:22 AM)
QUOTE (nopEda+)
The fact that humans are advanced so much more than any other creatures is evidence to me.
All that is evidence of is that we are more advanced! (some might disagree) We are just another species in this plant. Nothing special, except perhaps in our own minds.
If other animals had true language it would seem more likely that you're right, but none of them do. If some had language and some sort of written language it would be more evidence, but none do. If some designed and put tools together it woud be evidence, but none do. If some used tools to make dwellings and other tools etc it would be evidence, but none do. Etc....
If other animals had true language it would seem more likely that you're right, but none of them do. If some had language and some sort of written language it would be more evidence, but none do. If some designed and put tools together it woud be evidence, but none do. If some used tools to make dwellings and other tools etc it would be evidence, but none do. Etc....
QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 29 2009, 11:27 AM)
If other animals had true language it would seem more likely that you're right, but none of them do. If some had language and some sort of written language it would be more evidence, but none do. If some designed and put tools together it woud be evidence, but none do. If some used tools to make dwellings and other tools etc it would be evidence, but none do. Etc....
Why does language make us more special than all the other species? Flies have "special" compound eyes. Giraffes have "special" necks. Bats have "special" ears. Dolphins have "special" forms of communication. You just can't get over that humans aren't any more "highly evolved" than any other species.
Why does language make us more special than all the other species? Flies have "special" compound eyes. Giraffes have "special" necks. Bats have "special" ears. Dolphins have "special" forms of communication. You just can't get over that humans aren't any more "highly evolved" than any other species.
QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 29 2009, 09:57 PM)
If other animals had true language it would seem more likely that you're right, but none of them do. If some had language and some sort of written language it would be more evidence, but none do. If some designed and put tools together it woud be evidence, but none do. If some used tools to make dwellings and other tools etc it would be evidence, but none do. Etc....
Why is human biology so similar to animals? For example, if humans are so special, how come we don't have the strength of a thousand elephants? Why can't we fly like a bird or run like a cheetah?
Why is human biology so similar to animals? For example, if humans are so special, how come we don't have the strength of a thousand elephants? Why can't we fly like a bird or run like a cheetah?
QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 29 2009, 04:27 PM)
If other animals had true language it would seem more likely that you're right, but none of them do. If some had language and some sort of written language it would be more evidence, but none do. If some designed and put tools together it woud be evidence, but none do. If some used tools to make dwellings and other tools etc it would be evidence, but none do. Etc....
Speciesist. That's like racism, but with species.
Speciesist. That's like racism, but with species.
QUOTE (nopEda+Jul 29 2009, 04:27 PM)
All that is evidence of is that we are more advanced! (some might disagree) We are just another species in this plant. Nothing special, except perhaps in our own minds.[/QUOTE]
If other animals had true language it would seem more likely that you're right, but none of them do. If some had language and some sort of written language it would be more evidence, but none do. If some designed and put tools together it woud be evidence, but none do. If some used tools to make dwellings and other tools etc it would be evidence, but none do. Etc....
WOW I knew you were stupid and inexperienced, but you have never seen a bird's nest?
And AFAIK Elephants can communicate that one of their own is dead.
Your definition of language seems to be "what animals don't have"
If other animals had true language it would seem more likely that you're right, but none of them do. If some had language and some sort of written language it would be more evidence, but none do. If some designed and put tools together it woud be evidence, but none do. If some used tools to make dwellings and other tools etc it would be evidence, but none do. Etc....
WOW I knew you were stupid and inexperienced, but you have never seen a bird's nest?
And AFAIK Elephants can communicate that one of their own is dead.
Your definition of language seems to be "what animals don't have"
QUOTE (vkamath+Jul 29 2009, 02:00 PM)
Why is human biology so similar to animals? For example, if humans are so special, how come we don't have the strength of a thousand elephants? Why can't we fly like a bird or run like a cheetah?
uh.....because humans ARE special.
You missed the point. Humans are like 10,000 times smarter than an elephant, dolphin, or monkey, so they don't need to be 1000 times stronger or faster.
Even an autistic or "retarded" person is generally hundreds or even thousands of times smarter than a monkey or elephant.
Humans don't need wings, because they can build an airplane. With the invention of the internet, even most travel is no longer needed other than as a vacation and a left-over habitual artifact of prior economic models.
Bird nests and spider webs are not even remotely comparable to human inventions. They require little or no abstract thought and are mostly just habitual, learned behaviours involving the repetition of incredibly simple geometric patterns.
------
Human biology is similar to animal biology for the same reason Windows is similar to MacOs.
There is a certain underlying framework to physics, just as there is an underlying framework to the mechanics of a computer, and so biological processes are ultimately going to be quite similar regardless of where they are taking place or what creature they are a part of.
uh.....because humans ARE special.
You missed the point. Humans are like 10,000 times smarter than an elephant, dolphin, or monkey, so they don't need to be 1000 times stronger or faster.
Even an autistic or "retarded" person is generally hundreds or even thousands of times smarter than a monkey or elephant.
Humans don't need wings, because they can build an airplane. With the invention of the internet, even most travel is no longer needed other than as a vacation and a left-over habitual artifact of prior economic models.
Bird nests and spider webs are not even remotely comparable to human inventions. They require little or no abstract thought and are mostly just habitual, learned behaviours involving the repetition of incredibly simple geometric patterns.
------
Human biology is similar to animal biology for the same reason Windows is similar to MacOs.
There is a certain underlying framework to physics, just as there is an underlying framework to the mechanics of a computer, and so biological processes are ultimately going to be quite similar regardless of where they are taking place or what creature they are a part of.
QUOTE (Quantum_Conundrum+Jul 30 2009, 12:53 PM)
You missed the point. Humans are like 10,000 times smarter than an elephant, dolphin, or monkey, so they don't need to be 1000 times stronger or faster.
What? Are you 5? 10,000? Humans have only a small handful of adaptations that make us "smart." With that intelligence, we have not demonstrated our ability to live at equilibrium with our environment. Are you sure about that statement?
What? Are you 5? 10,000? Humans have only a small handful of adaptations that make us "smart." With that intelligence, we have not demonstrated our ability to live at equilibrium with our environment. Are you sure about that statement?
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Jul 30 2009, 01:18 PM)
What? Are you 5? 10,000? Humans have only a small handful of adaptations that make us "smart." With that intelligence, we have not demonstrated our ability to live at equilibrium with our environment. Are you sure about that statement?
What is the most complex "invention" you have ever heard of any animal making?
A bird's nest or a honeycomb or a spider web is the most complex thing I can think of that any other organism has ever made, and as stated previously, they are actually very simple repetitions.
Humans have invented devices that are literally billions or even trillions of times more complex than anything created by an animal: Super Computers, spacecraft, etc.
You do realize that a single stick of RAM in your computer has over one billion components?
Or the web applications that make this forum possible have tens of thousands of lines of code.
In contrast, even the smartest animals alive can scarcely be trained to do much more than the most absurdly basic things, even after several years of practice and training, such as a few simple signs for an orangutan, or hit the "feed me" button for some animals, or train a dog to track drugs or explosives. But that is the absolute limit of any known animal.
What is the most complex "invention" you have ever heard of any animal making?
A bird's nest or a honeycomb or a spider web is the most complex thing I can think of that any other organism has ever made, and as stated previously, they are actually very simple repetitions.
Humans have invented devices that are literally billions or even trillions of times more complex than anything created by an animal: Super Computers, spacecraft, etc.
You do realize that a single stick of RAM in your computer has over one billion components?
Or the web applications that make this forum possible have tens of thousands of lines of code.
In contrast, even the smartest animals alive can scarcely be trained to do much more than the most absurdly basic things, even after several years of practice and training, such as a few simple signs for an orangutan, or hit the "feed me" button for some animals, or train a dog to track drugs or explosives. But that is the absolute limit of any known animal.
I completely understand that humans have mastered the art of invention. The point is that humans are "special" only when you use human-valued qualifiers. What defines a great species? Is it the ability to invent or the ability to adapt and survive in any condition that makes a species "the best?" If it is the former, we are clearly the superior species. If it is the latter, then bacteria have a stranglehold on the competition. I am more confident that bacteria will still exist in a billion years than I am that any descendents of humans will.
QUOTE (Quantum_Conundrum+Jul 30 2009, 12:53 PM)
You missed the point. Humans are like 10,000 times smarter than an elephant, dolphin, or monkey, so they don't need to be 1000 times stronger or faster.
Hey dumbass; humans are only about 1.5-2.5 times smarter than a dolphin or monkey.
Not 10,000 times smarter.
Hey dumbass; humans are only about 1.5-2.5 times smarter than a dolphin or monkey.
Not 10,000 times smarter.
QUOTE (MjolnirPants+Jul 30 2009, 02:26 PM)
Hey dumbass; humans are only about 1.5-2.5 times smarter than a dolphin or monkey.
Not 10,000 times smarter.
Have you ever seen a dolphin or monkey make something that is 40-66% as complex as this web forum? Certainly not.
So then I highly doubt they are even remotely more than 1/1000th as intelligent as a human being when you consider all aspects of intelligence.
Not 10,000 times smarter.
Have you ever seen a dolphin or monkey make something that is 40-66% as complex as this web forum? Certainly not.
So then I highly doubt they are even remotely more than 1/1000th as intelligent as a human being when you consider all aspects of intelligence.
QUOTE (Quantum_Conundrum+Jul 30 2009, 02:42 PM)
Have you ever seen a dolphin or monkey make something that is 40-66% as complex as this web forum? Certainly not.
So then I highly doubt they are even remotely more than 1/1000th as intelligent as a human being when you consider all aspects of intelligence.
1. You're completely ignoring the fact that this internet forum was not created from scratch by a single person. Many people designed the first computers, thousands worked on intervening generations of computers until one powerful enough to run this forum was built. Many more people wrote software, created programming languages, designed networking protocols and many many more tasks so that one guy could sit down, open a program that works with asp or php and design this forum.
2. What have you ever built which is as complex as this forum? Nothing, I guarantee it. By your own logic, you're then far less intelligent than the human norm.
So then I highly doubt they are even remotely more than 1/1000th as intelligent as a human being when you consider all aspects of intelligence.
1. You're completely ignoring the fact that this internet forum was not created from scratch by a single person. Many people designed the first computers, thousands worked on intervening generations of computers until one powerful enough to run this forum was built. Many more people wrote software, created programming languages, designed networking protocols and many many more tasks so that one guy could sit down, open a program that works with asp or php and design this forum.
2. What have you ever built which is as complex as this forum? Nothing, I guarantee it. By your own logic, you're then far less intelligent than the human norm.
QUOTE (MjolnirPants+Jul 30 2009, 02:48 PM)
1. You're completely ignoring the fact that this internet forum was not created from scratch by a single person. Many people designed the first computers, thousands worked on intervening generations of computers until one powerful enough to run this forum was built. Many more people wrote software, created programming languages, designed networking protocols and many many more tasks so that one guy could sit down, open a program that works with asp or php and design this forum.
2. What have you ever built which is as complex as this forum? Nothing, I guarantee it. By your own logic, you're then far less intelligent than the human norm.
1) Point taken. However, humans are intelligent enough to build on the successes of others, and use the tools and components of other inventions to create new inventions. Animals are not. humans are intelligent enough to work together and break problems down so that other humans can work on smaller problems that are a part of the whole. Animals do not, and certainly not to any appreciable degree.
2) Actually, I have built some things which certainly are comparable to this internet forum in complexity. I built an RPG a few years back which was, I suppose, several thousand lines of code.
2. What have you ever built which is as complex as this forum? Nothing, I guarantee it. By your own logic, you're then far less intelligent than the human norm.
1) Point taken. However, humans are intelligent enough to build on the successes of others, and use the tools and components of other inventions to create new inventions. Animals are not. humans are intelligent enough to work together and break problems down so that other humans can work on smaller problems that are a part of the whole. Animals do not, and certainly not to any appreciable degree.
2) Actually, I have built some things which certainly are comparable to this internet forum in complexity. I built an RPG a few years back which was, I suppose, several thousand lines of code.
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.