2 questions to ask a theist.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-09-2012, 03:36 PM
RE: 2 questions to ask a theist.
(29-09-2012 03:33 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Yeah, well we've lost ALL respect for you. You have MOUNTAINS of questions you've never even addressed. I'm surprised you even have the guts to show your face here.

It's interesting that you've chosen to lose respect for me over only the loaded questions that remain unanswered instead of the answers I have given in 'mostly' respectful ways.

That's logic, right?

“What you believe to be true will control you, whether it’s true or not.”

—Jeremy LaBorde
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-09-2012, 03:40 PM (This post was last modified: 29-09-2012 04:39 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: 2 questions to ask a theist.
(29-09-2012 03:36 PM)ideasonscribe Wrote:  
(29-09-2012 03:33 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Yeah, well we've lost ALL respect for you. You have MOUNTAINS of questions you've never even addressed. I'm surprised you even have the guts to show your face here.

It's interesting that you've chosen to lose respect for me over only the loaded questions that remain unanswered instead of the answers I have given in 'mostly' respectful ways.

That's logic, right?

Interesting you find questions you can't answer "loaded" That's known as "paranoia". The disrespect was for YOU not even attempting to answer questions, not the manner the ones you picked and chose to answer was done.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-09-2012, 03:55 PM
RE: 2 questions to ask a theist.
(29-09-2012 03:40 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Interesting you find questions you can't answer "loaded" That's know as "paranoia". The disrespect was for YOU not even attempting to answer questions, not the manner the ones you picked and chose to answer was done.

They weren't question I can't answer, they were questions that, for me, take an exponential amount of time to give an adequate answer for. That's what I consider a loaded question.

One question, if I remember correctly, was "What, if any, is the compelling evidence for Christianity?"
[Vosur does his coffee-sipping deal to show his superiority in the conversation believing that I'm going to answer his question with the exact same thing that every Theist that comes here answers with - so he can break it all down, yet again, with the same Atheist Counter-Arguments]
So yes, it's a question that deserves more attention to - not just a half-assed answer.
After being confronted with several other loaded questions, I became overwhelmed. I then decided that I still need to focus on at least one of the questions. And then I just started to realize that most of the people on this forum act irrational towards every single argument sent their way. There are so many of you that don't even take arguments seriously, that it would honestly be a waste of my time to go into great detail with my arguments.
During my time here, there are only a very small few that actually give credit to the logic I use in coming to my conclusions. I think one reason A2 and I have good conversations is because he will even humor me and give me differing ideas that I hadn't thought of before.
The approach of most others on here is not the same. Just the "That's not evidence" and "Your argument is laughable" bullcrap you guys always say instead of coming back at me with something respectably professional to chew on.

As far as you losing respect for me because of this - good for you man.
I'm not invested in you, and I am so glad for that.
I guess if Steve lost respect for me, I would be a little butt hurt... Cause he's cool lol n stuff (Regardless, I know he does lose respect for me to a degree because of my attitude lately..)

So I'm sorry, but I'm not really interested in loading up the arguments for the questions at hand. Not in this place. Unless there were some respectable Atheists that actually gave some of their time to argue legitimately against me.
Lose respect? Go ahead.

“What you believe to be true will control you, whether it’s true or not.”

—Jeremy LaBorde
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-09-2012, 04:27 PM (This post was last modified: 30-09-2012 01:26 AM by Logica Humano.)
RE: 2 questions to ask a theist.
(29-09-2012 03:55 PM)ideasonscribe Wrote:  So I'm sorry, but I'm not really interested in loading up the arguments for the questions at hand. Not in this place. Unless there were some respectable Atheists that actually gave some of their time to argue legitimately against me.
Lose respect? Go ahead.

You, sir, disappoint me with your inarticulate avoidance of the questions presented to you. I have debated with you, and the only things that you were able to debate against were irrelevant to the topics at hand. You have done nothing to answer any meaningful questions directed towards your faith. Instead you feebly attempt create to a smokescreen of useless debates in order to cover up the fact that you can't answer the questions without admitting the flaws of your belief.

Then, when someone calls you on your intellectual dishonesty, you have the gall to complain? Some may pardon you and listen to your excuses, but many of us will press until you answer the damn questions.

[Image: Untitled-2.png?_subject_uid=322943157&am...Y7Dzq4lJog]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Logica Humano's post
29-09-2012, 06:06 PM
RE: 2 questions to ask a theist.
(29-09-2012 04:27 PM)Logica Humano Wrote:  
(29-09-2012 03:55 PM)ideasonscribe Wrote:  So I'm sorry, but I'm not really interested in loading up the arguments for the questions at hand. Not in this place. Unless there were some respectable Atheists that actually gave some of their time to argue legitimately against me.
Lose respect? Go ahead.

You, sir, disappoint me with your inarticulate avoidance of the questions presented to you. I have debated with you, and the only things that you were able to debate against were irrelevant to the topics at hand. You have done nothing to answer any meaningful questions directed towards your faith. Instead you feebly attempt create a smokescreen of useless debates in order to cover up the fact that you can't answer the questions without admitting the flaws of your belief.

Then, when someone calls you on your intellectual dishonesty, you have the gall to complain? Some may pardon you and listen to your excuses, but many of us will press until you answer the damn questions.

I'm sorry that you're disappointed in my approach on this forum.
The last "debate" I remember with you was something about the Omnipotence Paradox and the ridiculous circular arguing and word play that we were using. I do like getting into philosophical discussions that are roughly about something that is almost irrelevant to the fundamentals of my belief. That, however, is not avoidance.
I guess I do that sometimes because I get bored of trying to defend something like scriptural problems and contradictions, or the Cosmological Argument that's been over-argued to an extensive point.
I do get bored of these things, do you want me to say I'm sorry that I get bored of these?

"Instead you feebly attempt create a smokescreen of useless debates in order to cover up the fact that you can't answer the questions without admitting the flaws of your belief."

As far as my understanding, you see a lot more flaw in my belief than I do. Otherwise, I wouldn't continue to be in my belief. I am not someone who continues to believe something that has been shown to have completely unavoidable flaws. The understanding I have regarding the evidence available has largely led me to believe that God's existence is more probable. So when you say I'm creating a smokescreen of useless debates because I can't answer questions without admitting some flaws of my belief, you're not talking about me. When I see a flaw (Not when you see a flaw that you think I should see as a flaw), then I admit that flaw and go back to the drawing board to rethink my belief.
As unbiased as I try to be, you guys still come at me with this. As if I'm the same old belligerent Fundamentalist Christian that comes in to try and teach the Atheist a thing-or-two.
That's bull crap. I have serious doubts about so many things in my belief and am still in limbo with those problems until I find a more logical answer to them. I don't settle with answers given to me by people who got their answer from some other guy who got their answer from a loony pastor who got his answer from an almost forgotten book.

I want the truth about life, I will NOT settle for less. If I cannot have the absolute truth, then the only thing I can have will be the closest thing to the truth.
If the truth about life is that Christianity is a fabricated belief brought on by fools who had mental problems, then if I search long enough, I'll find the damn answer eventually.

So Logica, if I find a legitimate sound flaw in my belief, I WILL admit it.
But just because you think something is a flaw, doesn't mean you're right. The same goes for me. But at least I'm still searching for the answer.

“What you believe to be true will control you, whether it’s true or not.”

—Jeremy LaBorde
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-09-2012, 06:24 PM
RE: 2 questions to ask a theist.
The question is, "what would he consider a 'flaw'?" He's been given many, and resisted them all.
In his system, he believes because he's been granted the virtue of faith, by the Holy Spirit. (just like Craig says.)
It's not about "flaws".
(It's about "needs", and the dismantling of a complex, multi-centered worldview, or mega-belief,
like a Fullerene, or geodesic, .... and what to replace it with.)
It's about "graceful degradation".




Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-09-2012, 07:01 PM
RE: 2 questions to ask a theist.
(29-09-2012 06:24 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  The question is, "what would he consider a 'flaw'?" He's been given many, and resisted them all.
In his system, he believes because he's been granted the virtue of faith, by the Holy Spirit. (just like Craig says.)
It's not about "flaws".
(It's about "needs", and the dismantling of a complex, multi-centered worldview, or mega-belief,
like a Fullerene, or geodesic, .... and what to replace it with.)
It's about "graceful degradation".




I actually really enjoy that video, and really respect the understanding within the video itself.
Believe it or not, after watching that video (When you posted it a while back) I wanted to step back from any belief I had and become belief-less until I could better understand things. I guess the problem was that I will always believe in objective truth. That is something that I believe is Universal regardless of anyones belief or opinion. Objective truth is something that is true regardless of the thoughts or beliefs of any person, aside from what some believe is the problem of reality in perspective to being perceived through consciousness - or however.

Understanding that there is objective truth is, perhaps, what separates me from the Atheist.
God either exists, or he doesn't.
Take away all the beliefs in the world, all the religions and all the problems created therein - It doesn't make God not exist if he does.
If every single person on earth became an Atheist, if God actually Objectively exists - then He still continues to exist. It would just be kind of comical that no one believed in him lol

So I fall back on the probability issue. Finding more probability in somethings existence is all I can go on for now, so that's where I find myself until further education.

This may be a little off-topic, but I like that video so much that I am working on making my own regarding my own topic with similar style animations. I've been trying to get ahold of the person that created that video to figure out what program(s) he used to make it. No luck yet.

“What you believe to be true will control you, whether it’s true or not.”

—Jeremy LaBorde
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-09-2012, 07:26 PM (This post was last modified: 29-09-2012 07:33 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: 2 questions to ask a theist.
(29-09-2012 07:01 PM)ideasonscribe Wrote:  I actually really enjoy that video, and really respect the understanding within the video itself.
Believe it or not, after watching that video (When you posted it a while back) I wanted to step back from any belief I had and become belief-less until I could better understand things. I guess the problem was that I will always believe in objective truth. That is something that I believe is Universal regardless of anyones belief or opinion. Objective truth is something that is true regardless of the thoughts or beliefs of any person, aside from what some believe is the problem of reality in perspective to being perceived through consciousness - or however.

Understanding that there is objective truth is, perhaps, what separates me from the Atheist.
God either exists, or he doesn't.
Take away all the beliefs in the world, all the religions and all the problems created therein - It doesn't make God not exist if he does.
If every single person on earth became an Atheist, if God actually Objectively exists - then He still continues to exist. It would just be kind of comical that no one believed in him lol

So I fall back on the probability issue. Finding more probability in somethings existence is all I can go on for now, so that's where I find myself until further education.

This may be a little off-topic, but I like that video so much that I am working on making my own regarding my own topic with similar style animations. I've been trying to get ahold of the person that created that video to figure out what program(s) he used to make it. No luck yet.

Thanks for the reply. The thing is, believing in a universal Truth, or objective Reality, (which most atheists agree with, as that's what science is supposed to tell us about), doesn't lead to Yahweh. It leads away from Yahweh. So which god is left ? Objective Reality does, (or might) exist, independent of an observer, (well in some ways, I won't get technical with Physics), but belief in god(s) is not related to that. One does not need a god for that to be true. How does that lead to god ? The "standard" for what you think is "objective truth" exists only in your brain. It's not "out there", and is different for each person, unless it's compared, and validated. How is that validated ? Science. Not the Bible, which we know is not "objectively true" in any way.
How would you know "objective truth" if you saw it ?

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-09-2012, 07:38 PM (This post was last modified: 29-09-2012 07:46 PM by Vosur.)
RE: 2 questions to ask a theist.
(29-09-2012 03:36 PM)ideasonscribe Wrote:  It's interesting that you've chosen to lose respect for me over only the loaded questions that remain unanswered instead of the answers I have given in 'mostly' respectful ways.
(29-09-2012 03:55 PM)ideasonscribe Wrote:  They weren't question I can't answer, they were questions that, for me, take an exponential amount of time to give an adequate answer for. That's what I consider a loaded question.

One question, if I remember correctly, was "What, if any, is the compelling evidence for Christianity?
Oh stop it, you clown. It's been almost two months and you have yet to comment on any on the threads in which you made extraordinary claims without providing any evidence. The resurrection of Jesus thread, the compelling evidence for Christianity thread and last but not least the thread in which you claimed that god is good despite the atrocities commited and ordered by him in the OT. In our previous debates, you have shown that your logical thinking skills are flawed and that you tend to get butthurt when called out on it very quickly. You act like you think you're a fucking genius, thinking that you're that one person who possesses compelling evidence for Christianity and the resurrection of Christ and yet it's been two months and you haven't presented any evidence at all. That and you continue to claim that your evidence leads you to the conclusion that god's existence is more probable than his non-existence, without naming anything to support it.

Do you really expect anyone to take you seriously?

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Vosur's post
29-09-2012, 07:57 PM
RE: 2 questions to ask a theist.
(29-09-2012 06:06 PM)ideasonscribe Wrote:  
(29-09-2012 04:27 PM)Logica Humano Wrote:  You, sir, disappoint me with your inarticulate avoidance of the questions presented to you. I have debated with you, and the only things that you were able to debate against were irrelevant to the topics at hand. You have done nothing to answer any meaningful questions directed towards your faith. Instead you feebly attempt create a smokescreen of useless debates in order to cover up the fact that you can't answer the questions without admitting the flaws of your belief.

Then, when someone calls you on your intellectual dishonesty, you have the gall to complain? Some may pardon you and listen to your excuses, but many of us will press until you answer the damn questions.

I'm sorry that you're disappointed in my approach on this forum.
The last "debate" I remember with you was something about the Omnipotence Paradox and the ridiculous circular arguing and word play that we were using. I do like getting into philosophical discussions that are roughly about something that is almost irrelevant to the fundamentals of my belief. That, however, is not avoidance.
I guess I do that sometimes because I get bored of trying to defend something like scriptural problems and contradictions, or the Cosmological Argument that's been over-argued to an extensive point.
I do get bored of these things, do you want me to say I'm sorry that I get bored of these?

"Instead you feebly attempt create a smokescreen of useless debates in order to cover up the fact that you can't answer the questions without admitting the flaws of your belief."

As far as my understanding, you see a lot more flaw in my belief than I do. Otherwise, I wouldn't continue to be in my belief. I am not someone who continues to believe something that has been shown to have completely unavoidable flaws. The understanding I have regarding the evidence available has largely led me to believe that God's existence is more probable. So when you say I'm creating a smokescreen of useless debates because I can't answer questions without admitting some flaws of my belief, you're not talking about me. When I see a flaw (Not when you see a flaw that you think I should see as a flaw), then I admit that flaw and go back to the drawing board to rethink my belief.
As unbiased as I try to be, you guys still come at me with this. As if I'm the same old belligerent Fundamentalist Christian that comes in to try and teach the Atheist a thing-or-two.
That's bull crap. I have serious doubts about so many things in my belief and am still in limbo with those problems until I find a more logical answer to them. I don't settle with answers given to me by people who got their answer from some other guy who got their answer from a loony pastor who got his answer from an almost forgotten book.

I want the truth about life, I will NOT settle for less. If I cannot have the absolute truth, then the only thing I can have will be the closest thing to the truth.
If the truth about life is that Christianity is a fabricated belief brought on by fools who had mental problems, then if I search long enough, I'll find the damn answer eventually.

So Logica, if I find a legitimate sound flaw in my belief, I WILL admit it.
But just because you think something is a flaw, doesn't mean you're right. The same goes for me. But at least I'm still searching for the answer.

Why do you hold the illogical position that Christianity is true, that God exists?
The only honest position is to be agnostic and await or search for evidence.
So far, there is no evidence for and mountains of evidence against.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: