Ask a Theist!
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 9 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-12-2011, 10:51 AM (This post was last modified: 29-12-2011 10:56 AM by kingschosen.)
RE: Ask a Theist!
(29-12-2011 10:39 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(29-12-2011 10:35 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  But Chas, it's not circular if there is an acceptance of an omni-all God that has an infinite will and infinite plan. This is what I believe.

I'm saying your whole belief system is bizarre and full of circular reasoning.
So attempts to clarify it are doomed. I don't understand why people keep asking, except it may be like throwing a ball for a dog.

I beginning to think that as well. I'm doing a lot of repeating.
That's being a little liberal with the theory. Yeah, I see God in science, but I don't believe that there are scientific things we'll never understand. My belief that God is in science has nothing to do with proving anything. It fact, science has no bearing on my belief in God.

It's my faith in God that's reconciled the awesome mysteries of science as part of His plan.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-12-2011, 11:05 AM (This post was last modified: 29-12-2011 11:17 AM by ddrew.)
RE: Ask a Theist!
(29-12-2011 10:39 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(29-12-2011 10:35 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  But Chas, it's not circular if there is an acceptance of an omni-all God that has an infinite will and infinite plan. This is what I believe.

I'm saying your whole belief system is bizarre and full of circular reasoning.
So attempts to clarify it are doomed. I don't understand why people keep asking, except it may be like throwing a ball for a dog.

And here it comes down to what I believe, I believe that ultimatly mankind will never 'know' all the answers while we exist in our current state. Whatever powers are in control of this universe be it a supernatural force or natural. We are trapped within the confines of our limited but still evolving minds. We will continue to evolve and as we do so will our knowledge of the '"how's and why's". Short of the human race falling victim to extinction, we as a collective species will continue the ultimate goals and driving force behind every species... continue to breed and perpetuate the survival of our kind.

Ideas of science and god will continue to evolve just as it has over the past thousands of years. We will continue to ask questions, we'll continue to have bizarre and circular reasoning when it comes to religion. Good will continue to combat evil. Mankind will continue to fight to survive against the extinction of our race. It's in our nature.

So everyone just sit your ass back... grab a damn beer, chill out, and don't forget to enjoy all the breeding! Big Grin

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. -- Voltaire
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like ddrew's post
29-12-2011, 11:09 AM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(29-12-2011 09:43 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  Good point. I guess the only other explanation that I can conceive is that either God satiated the animals or "food" animals were brought as well.

Actually no. I would actually debate that no, food animals were not brought aboard, but I have some paint to watch while it dries and I've been postponing that for days. It has nothing to do with the fact that after a lot of effort from my part you would still be able in the end to say that god did it.

So, when no other explanation makes sense and you actually don't have anything to support your position, you say to yourself: "You know what else doesn't have to make sense? Miracles. That's it!"

So it doesn't occur to you that maybe god wouldn't be such a poor planner as to be forced to make one million complicated miracles just to keep your story afloat when he could do a simple one and be done with it.

"Job, go to the other room and see if you can find me there. The rest of you men, women, children and babies get teleported to hell right now." No putrefaction, no silly plan involving hydraulics, dark matter, sugar, spice, Brittney Spears's virginity and a rubber chicken.

And what's with god and all the babies? Send an army, send a flood, send fire from the sky, send another army, let no baby alive.

Babies die: soon after conception, in each trimester, right before birth, soon after birth and very often in the following months. And these are all natural causes and accidents. Acts of god.

I guess it's all that crying. God hears each and everyone of them 24/7, he can't get any sleep and that makes him very grumpy. Every time that happens, he starts shaking a few millions of them.

God must smile up in heaven every time humans make an abortion. Those conservative pricks are fucked!

Oh, no Hallucinations 4:11 says the 'gilded sheep should be stewed in rat blood' but Morons 5:16 contradicts it. (Chas)

I would never shake a baby unless the recipe requires it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Malleus's post
29-12-2011, 11:38 AM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(29-12-2011 11:09 AM)Malleus Wrote:  
(29-12-2011 09:43 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  Good point. I guess the only other explanation that I can conceive is that either God satiated the animals or "food" animals were brought as well.

Actually no. I would actually debate that no, food animals were not brought aboard, but I have some paint to watch while it dries and I've been postponing that for days. It has nothing to do with the fact that after a lot of effort from my part you would still be able in the end to say that god did it.

I would actually appreciate that if you did. And no, I wouldn't cop out that easily.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-12-2011, 11:55 AM
RE: Ask a Theist!
I'm reminded of the bad old days of the R&P on myspace (after just learning myspace scrapped its forums, I guess the R&P is legendary. Tongue) this line usta always come up:

So it's alright to kill babies?

The problem with KC is, he's a good guy. I'm not a good guy. I'm evil. Angel

Isn't it ironic, dontcha think... a little too ironic...



...that a hypothetical evil Calvinist could explain it all? Angel

I'm a mercurial bitch. If I was new to this forum I might be swinging the axe at KC knees, but because I've been here a while, I know him enough to like him, and to disagree with what seems like personal attacks...

Which is just me, sticking my nose in here thanks to Exormai and tao...

[Image: ZF1ZJ4M.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like houseofcantor's post
29-12-2011, 12:46 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(29-12-2011 11:38 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  I would actually appreciate that if you did. And no, I wouldn't cop out that easily.

You're totally missing the point. If your position, as described in my previous post, is me *winning* that debate, you couldn't pay me enough to try. If I lose that debate, you only proved that it's possible, not that it actually happened. Nobody can really lose or win that particular debate because you can always play the "god works in mysterious ways" card and I will definitely have to ask for proof to see that such a theory is not only possible, but also that it really happened.

And we both know that you don't have such proof simply because you made it up (or you got it from somebody who made it up) as a possibility to explain the unexplainable and you're ready to abandon it for the god card should it ever fail.

We also both know that this is called "shifting the burden of proof". You're asking me to prove that something didn't happen when you should be the one to provide proof for why we should believe that it did. It's the equivalent of "guilty until proven innocent" and you can't honestly believe that it's fair.

Oh, no Hallucinations 4:11 says the 'gilded sheep should be stewed in rat blood' but Morons 5:16 contradicts it. (Chas)

I would never shake a baby unless the recipe requires it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-12-2011, 12:50 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(29-12-2011 12:46 PM)Malleus Wrote:  
(29-12-2011 11:38 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  I would actually appreciate that if you did. And no, I wouldn't cop out that easily.

You're totally missing the point. If your position, as described in my previous post, is me *winning* that debate, you couldn't pay me enough to try. If I lose that debate, you only proved that it's possible, not that it actually happened. Nobody can really lose or win that particular debate because you can always play the "god works in mysterious ways" card and I will definitely have to ask for proof to see that such a theory is not only possible, but also that it really happened.

And we both know that you don't have such proof simply because you made it up (or you got it from somebody who made it up) as a possibility to explain the unexplainable and you're ready to abandon it for the god card should it ever fail.

We also both know that this is called "shifting the burden of proof". You're asking me to prove that something didn't happen when you should be the one to provide proof for why we should believe that it did. It's the equivalent of "guilty until proven innocent" and you can't honestly believe that it's fair.

Nah, dude. I was just wanting you to (try) disprove me. It's things like this that cause me to become less ignorant and more learned; thus, evolving my beliefs. I know you don't want to argue atheists vs theist or theist vs theist, but I was just interested in what you were going to say.

It would cause me to try and strengthen my argument or do research to find a better answer.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kingschosen's post
29-12-2011, 06:08 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(29-12-2011 12:50 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(29-12-2011 12:46 PM)Malleus Wrote:  
(29-12-2011 11:38 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  I would actually appreciate that if you did. And no, I wouldn't cop out that easily.

You're totally missing the point. If your position, as described in my previous post, is me *winning* that debate, you couldn't pay me enough to try. If I lose that debate, you only proved that it's possible, not that it actually happened. Nobody can really lose or win that particular debate because you can always play the "god works in mysterious ways" card and I will definitely have to ask for proof to see that such a theory is not only possible, but also that it really happened.

And we both know that you don't have such proof simply because you made it up (or you got it from somebody who made it up) as a possibility to explain the unexplainable and you're ready to abandon it for the god card should it ever fail.

We also both know that this is called "shifting the burden of proof". You're asking me to prove that something didn't happen when you should be the one to provide proof for why we should believe that it did. It's the equivalent of "guilty until proven innocent" and you can't honestly believe that it's fair.

Nah, dude. I was just wanting you to (try) disprove me. It's things like this that cause me to become less ignorant and more learned; thus, evolving my beliefs. I know you don't want to argue atheists vs theist or theist vs theist, but I was just interested in what you were going to say.

It would cause me to try and strengthen my argument or do research to find a better answer.

But KC, notice what you're not saying. You're not saying, "It might cause me to reconsider my position. It might cause me to conclude my beliefs were wrong." That's why many of us find arguing with theists--even nice theists like you--so frustrating. No matter what we could possibly say, you'd hold on doggedly to your belief, because your belief is a matter of faith, not of evidence or logic. So your response is to try to strengthen your argument or "do research to find a better answer"--that is, to find better reasons to believe what you're determined to believe no matter what--but never to say, "Yeah, I see what you mean. Guess I was wrong." If this is a mischaracterization, though, please let me know.

Religious disputes are like arguments in a madhouse over which inmate really is Napoleon.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cufflink's post
29-12-2011, 07:35 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(29-12-2011 10:39 AM)Chas Wrote:  I don't understand why people keep asking, except it may be like throwing a ball for a dog.

Damn it, Chas. Don't let our secret out of the bag or he might go and give us the sad puppy picture.

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-12-2011, 11:49 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(29-12-2011 06:08 PM)cufflink Wrote:  But KC, notice what you're not saying. You're not saying, "It might cause me to reconsider my position. It might cause me to conclude my beliefs were wrong." That's why many of us find arguing with theists--even nice theists like you--so frustrating. No matter what we could possibly say, you'd hold on doggedly to your belief, because your belief is a matter of faith, not of evidence or logic. So your response is to try to strengthen your argument or "do research to find a better answer"--that is, to find better reasons to believe what you're determined to believe no matter what--but never to say, "Yeah, I see what you mean. Guess I was wrong." If this is a mischaracterization, though, please let me know.

Nope, you're right. But, that doesn't mean we can't have productive, good conversation. Just because I'm stalwart in my faith, that doesn't mean I can't see another point of view and see how my beliefs would be different if I didn't have my faith. I mean... we're here aren't we? Might as well talk about something.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like kingschosen's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: