Calvin's Bizarre Doctrine.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-12-2011, 04:48 PM
RE: Calvin's Bizarre Doctrine.
(02-12-2011 04:44 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(02-12-2011 04:37 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
Quote:Even if you could prove this god exists, I would not serve, worship, or bow down to such an insane being.

And just how do you know you're among the elect?

I had a radical conversation.

So you don't know that you're among the elect, you believe without evidence that you are.

Evidence? I have plenty.

However, my evidence can't be used in the TTA courthouse.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like kingschosen's post
02-12-2011, 04:52 PM
RE: Calvin's Bizarre Doctrine.
(02-12-2011 04:48 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(02-12-2011 04:44 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(02-12-2011 04:37 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
Quote:Even if you could prove this god exists, I would not serve, worship, or bow down to such an insane being.

And just how do you know you're among the elect?

I had a radical conversation.

So you don't know that you're among the elect, you believe without evidence that you are.

Evidence? I have plenty.

However, my evidence can't be used in the TTA courthouse.

Then whatever you think you've got, it's not evidence.

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
02-12-2011, 04:57 PM
RE: Calvin's Bizarre Doctrine.
(02-12-2011 04:44 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(02-12-2011 04:37 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
Quote:Even if you could prove this god exists, I would not serve, worship, or bow down to such an insane being.

And just how do you know you're among the elect?

I had a radical conversation.

So you don't know that you're among the elect, you believe without evidence that you are.

I disagree. I will not justify Calvin, who was a nutbag; but kingschosen has demonstrated integrity.

This is how I map it out:

For kingschosen, a trinity exists: kingschosen, the universe, and God. Out of those three, only one certainty is possible: kingschosen. In an individual without integrity, this is a dangerous proposition. kingschosen, however; in identifying with himself and god - a dual-state - dedicates his being in service to a glorious identity greater than his. That others do not have this identification due to their own interpretations of self and god kingschosen has determined not to rectify. As has been demonstrated by lack of proselytism and participating in this atheistic community.

My disagreement here is in trusting the sincerity of kingschosen over a work of literature that can be interpreted in a zillion and a half ways. Wink

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.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
02-12-2011, 04:59 PM (This post was last modified: 02-12-2011 05:01 PM by kingschosen.)
RE: Calvin's Bizarre Doctrine.
(02-12-2011 04:52 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(02-12-2011 04:48 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(02-12-2011 04:44 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(02-12-2011 04:37 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
Quote:Even if you could prove this god exists, I would not serve, worship, or bow down to such an insane being.

And just how do you know you're among the elect?

I had a radical conversation.

So you don't know that you're among the elect, you believe without evidence that you are.

Evidence? I have plenty.

However, my evidence can't be used in the TTA courthouse.

Then whatever you think you've got, it's not evidence.

I suppose that depends on the judge.

/shrug

But, convincing you is a non-factor, since you obviously weren't interested in what believe or why I believe it because you were only interested in trying to convince me to believe what you believe.

Which, as I've stated before, is hilariously ironic - especially on an atheist forum.
(02-12-2011 04:57 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(02-12-2011 04:44 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(02-12-2011 04:37 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
Quote:Even if you could prove this god exists, I would not serve, worship, or bow down to such an insane being.

And just how do you know you're among the elect?

I had a radical conversation.

So you don't know that you're among the elect, you believe without evidence that you are.

I disagree. I will not justify Calvin, who was a nutbag; but kingschosen has demonstrated integrity.

This is how I map it out:

For kingschosen, a trinity exists: kingschosen, the universe, and God. Out of those three, only one certainty is possible: kingschosen. In an individual without integrity, this is a dangerous proposition. kingschosen, however; in identifying with himself and god - a dual-state - dedicates his being in service to a glorious identity greater than his. That others do not have this identification due to their own interpretations of self and god kingschosen has determined not to rectify. As has been demonstrated by lack of proselytism and participating in this atheistic community.

My disagreement here is in trusting the sincerity of kingschosen over a work of literature that can be interpreted in a zillion and a half ways. Wink

Wow.

That's actually quite an impressive assessment.

And, I understand all of it! Go me.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like kingschosen's post
02-12-2011, 05:05 PM
RE: Calvin's Bizarre Doctrine.
(02-12-2011 04:57 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(02-12-2011 04:44 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(02-12-2011 04:37 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
Quote:Even if you could prove this god exists, I would not serve, worship, or bow down to such an insane being.

And just how do you know you're among the elect?

I had a radical conversation.

So you don't know that you're among the elect, you believe without evidence that you are.

I disagree. I will not justify Calvin, who was a nutbag; but kingschosen has demonstrated integrity.

This is how I map it out:

For kingschosen, a trinity exists: kingschosen, the universe, and God. Out of those three, only one certainty is possible: kingschosen. In an individual without integrity, this is a dangerous proposition. kingschosen, however; in identifying with himself and god - a dual-state - dedicates his being in service to a glorious identity greater than his. That others do not have this identification due to their own interpretations of self and god kingschosen has determined not to rectify. As has been demonstrated by lack of proselytism and participating in this atheistic community.

My disagreement here is in trusting the sincerity of kingschosen over a work of literature that can be interpreted in a zillion and a half ways. Wink

I am not talking about literature or sincerity. I agree that kingschosen seems sincere, and he is polite, but he is stating belief, not evidence. His identification of self and god is not an objective fact, but a subjective state or feeling.

Regardless of his sincerity, he is deluded by his internal beliefs that are unconnected to the external reality, therefore no evidence is forthcoming.

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
02-12-2011, 05:07 PM (This post was last modified: 02-12-2011 05:10 PM by houseofcantor.)
RE: Calvin's Bizarre Doctrine.
(02-12-2011 04:59 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Wow.

That's actually quite an impressive assessment.

And, I understand all of it! Go me.
The universe approves of my love of Gwyneth Paltrow. Wink

You have demonstrated identity and integrity to this moral judge. We need not bicker over the details. Wink

(those other cats... are themselves)

(02-12-2011 05:05 PM)Chas Wrote:  Regardless of his sincerity, he is deluded by his internal beliefs that are unconnected to the external reality, therefore no evidence is forthcoming.

Well, there's this number 4 in my head named ellenjanuary? And all that exists is electricity and chemistry to the brain in a box but ellenjanuary can sometimes hold a rational conversation.

Sometimes. Wink

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-12-2011, 05:15 PM
RE: Calvin's Bizarre Doctrine.
(02-12-2011 04:59 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  I suppose that depends on the judge.

/shrug

You seem to have already judged it, since you said it couldn't be used here.
Quote:But, convincing you is a non-factor, since you obviously weren't interested in what believe or why I believe it because you were only interested in trying to convince me to believe what you believe.

Which, as I've stated before, is hilariously ironic - especially on an atheist forum.
I am not trying to convince you of my beliefs, except to point out that you have provided no evidence, just your internally generated beliefs.

I am fascinated by your beliefs, and why you believe them, but you always stop with "it's what I believe due to my mystical experience, so it's true".

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
02-12-2011, 06:23 PM
 
RE: Calvin's Bizarre Doctrine.
Quote:you have provided no evidence, just your internally generated beliefs.

yeah, but once you have gotten past the evidence thing, he is actually pretty good to talk to. at least he is pretty consistent. consistently bonkers if you ask me, but consistent and honest none the less.
Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes paulesungnomo's post
02-12-2011, 06:34 PM (This post was last modified: 02-12-2011 06:39 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Calvin's Bizarre Doctrine.
(02-12-2011 04:57 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  ... but kingschosen has demonstrated integrity.

Agreed, and he's probably the best suited to smell out Christian trolls.

(02-12-2011 04:57 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  This is how I map it out:

For kingschosen, a trinity exists: kingschosen, the universe, and God. Out of those three, only one certainty is possible: kingschosen.

Dude, I spent like a semester studying cogito ergo sum and there's no certainty of me, let alone kingschosen.

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-12-2011, 06:41 PM
RE: Calvin's Bizarre Doctrine.
(02-12-2011 06:34 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Dude, I spent like a semester studying cogito ergo sum and there's no certainty of kingschosen.

But we're past that with the amo ergo sum. I am able to make note of a clear parallel:

kingschosen knows "God."
I know "I love Gwyneth Paltrow."

In each case, an individual of vast complexity finds integrity in a singular identifier. I seem to do more proselytizing on behalf of my Gwynnies than he does for God. Wink

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: