Logic vs. Theism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-03-2017, 04:09 PM
RE: Logic vs. Theism
(22-03-2017 04:05 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  
(22-03-2017 02:06 PM)JesseB Wrote:  .... Math doesn't define anything, it's used to describe things. Math is a fucking language dude...

So....you're position is dependent on you not knowing that like .... coin flips exist....

The rest of your points are either meaningless inaccurate gibberish, or are true but not evidence of anything in particular....

There's actually a lot more wrong with what you just said but I'm kinda tied up with epic facepalms after reading this, I'll let the inquisition finish.

I should have said described. Like I said; I was short on time. And it does speak to intelligent design.

Show evidence that a coin toss is random or based on chance. I assure you it is neither, but think for yourself. I'll wait. Everything happens for a reason though you may not believe it. It doesn't need your belief to be true.

No; alone they are evidence of no thing in particular. You are correct. But I never said it was irrifutable proof. The points I attempted to mention, together, do lean more towards a cause than no case which is nonsensical.



faith in selfless unity for good

Problem is they don't equate to any evidence, as there is no compelling evidence for your god.

And your claim on coin tosses is entirely baseless. Again math describes the world does not dictate it, so any plea to statistical likelihoods isn't evidence in your corner. Also no mathematician would agree with you even if you attempted to go that route.

Your points lean towards nothing, literally, nothing. IF your god existed the evidence would be clear an overwhelming based on the claims made by your religion. The fact that you have to stretch so far to make the odd pieces kinda almost fit your narrative is evidence that you're full of shit. There's a word for people who do things like this, charlatan.

DLJ Wrote:And, yes, the principle of freedom of expression works both ways... if someone starts shit, better shit is the best counter-argument.
Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes JesseB's post
22-03-2017, 04:11 PM
RE: Logic vs. Theism
(22-03-2017 02:52 PM)DLJ Wrote:  
(22-03-2017 11:33 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Oohh oohh! Pick me, pick me...

Leviticus: 19. 18. Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.

Matthew: 5. 43. Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.

Matthew: 19. 19. Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

Matthew: 22. 39. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

James: 2. 8. If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well:

peace

faith in selfless unity for good

(19-03-2017 08:03 AM)DLJ Wrote:  10 bucks says that it's the old 'NT rules and regulations supersede OT rules and regs, therefore "Love thy neighbour"' routine.

No reason why, of course, that one cannot 'love' thy slave-neighbour.

Which I'm sure happened quite a lot.

Blink

Called it!

Yay me.

Big Grin
Play dumb... It's OK.

Maybe you didn't notice the first verse was from the OT.

And no you cannot love and enslave someone. That just isn't how love works.



faith in selfless unity for good
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-03-2017, 04:11 PM
RE: Logic vs. Theism
(22-03-2017 12:51 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Wait.... What? Physicality in no way determines existence; especially when speaking of metaphysics.

The problem is that metaphysics, at least as you are using it, has no connection to existence. If you think it does please provide the evidence.

(22-03-2017 01:43 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  There is zero evidence of matter springing from non matter whatsoever.

Then it's a good thing that you are the only one making any claim that could be read that way.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes unfogged's post
22-03-2017, 04:14 PM (This post was last modified: 22-03-2017 04:18 PM by JesseB.)
RE: Logic vs. Theism
(22-03-2017 04:11 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  
(22-03-2017 02:52 PM)DLJ Wrote:  Called it!

Yay me.

Big Grin
Play dumb... It's OK.

Maybe you didn't notice the first verse was from the OT.

And no you cannot love and enslave someone. That just isn't how love works.



faith in selfless unity for good

Bullshit.

1. Slaves aren't considered people until the new testament, when the bible says to be nice to their slaves (a HUGE shift in policy, notice they are still slaves, and NO one except you thinks the bible doesn't condone and support slavery), slaves are considered to be property. (OH and ALL of my stuff on slavery was from the NEW testament, I included old testament rules on slavery earlier in this discussion too, you are so full of shit)

2. The bible constantly contradicts itself

3. The request was for ANY point where the bible says "Slavery bad don't do it"
you coming back with "love your neighbor" is a bullshit answer.

I'd tell you to stop openly lying to people, but your bible technically doesn't have any problem with lying. So you'd just continue to lie.

DLJ Wrote:And, yes, the principle of freedom of expression works both ways... if someone starts shit, better shit is the best counter-argument.
Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like JesseB's post
22-03-2017, 04:21 PM
RE: Logic vs. Theism
(22-03-2017 04:08 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  
(22-03-2017 02:08 PM)JesseB Wrote:  There was a time when Christians though so.... you're that unaware of your own religions history?

The basic point is they get shit ass backwards wrong all the time.... some divinely inspired reflection of reality......
Show me what prophet or messenger of GOD that said we are the center of the universe, and then understand that I ,nor my belief in or faithfulness towards GOD are not the product of the indocrination of man, fear, nor gullibility.

As if it must closely follow the errors of man in order to have faith in GOD.

Try not stereotyping people. I have to at times.

peace

faith in selfless unity for good

That's why you need to define your god in a falsifiable manner, so far you have tossed around poorly defined terms while attempting to shift the burden of proof.

You can't have any meaningful conversation until you do this.

I'm perfectly satisfied by saying a supposed god would put as at a very important point in the universe and we would see clear evidence of this. Since we don't see this, a god of this type is falsified.

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like TheInquisition's post
22-03-2017, 04:22 PM
RE: Logic vs. Theism
(22-03-2017 01:48 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Likewise it doesn't imply no GOD, and actually all things point to an ultimate cause.

What implies "no god" is the complete lack of evidence for such a thing. The only things pointing to an "ultimate cause" are in your little fantasy world.

(22-03-2017 02:02 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Cause and effect

Says nothing about the existence of a god or any cause for the universe.

Quote:The visible lack of chaos in observable existence.

Says nothing about the existence of a god or any cause for the universe.

Quote:The fact that all observable existence can be perfectly defined with mathematics.

Says nothing about the existence of a god or any cause for the universe. In fact, you have that completely backwards; math is a tool we created to describe the universe. The fact that it describes the universe is hardly surprising given that's what we fucking designed it to do. No god required.

Quote:The fact that all things seem to have a life cycle or designated path (really just lack of chaos again)

Says nothing about the existence of a god or any cause for the universe.

Quote:The fact that there is no evidence for coincidence or chance.

Now you have really gone off the deep end.

Quote:The very fact that we have emotion that assigns significance to things shoes that there is purpose to life and as such; existence as a whole.

No, it does not.

Quote:I can go on but am quite tied up at the moment.

They finally got the straitjacket on? About time.

(22-03-2017 04:05 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  I should have said described. Like I said; I was short on time. And it does speak to intelligent design.

No, it does not.

Quote:Show evidence that a coin toss is random or based on chance. I assure you it is neither, but think for yourself. I'll wait. Everything happens for a reason though you may not believe it. It doesn't need your belief to be true.

But it does need MUCH more than your unsupported assertion to be believable. Please demonstrate how you can tell that coin flips are not random.

Quote:No; alone they are evidence of no thing in particular. You are correct. But I never said it was irrifutable proof. The points I attempted to mention, together, do lean more towards a cause than no case which is nonsensical

The only thing nonsensical here is you.

(22-03-2017 04:08 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Show me what prophet or messenger of GOD that said we are the center of the universe, and then understand that I ,nor my belief in or faithfulness towards GOD are not the product of the indocrination of man, fear, nor gullibility.

Perhaps not indoctrination in your case. I would not rule out fear or gullibility so quickly.

You need help Pops. Get some.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like unfogged's post
22-03-2017, 04:25 PM
RE: Logic vs. Theism
(22-03-2017 04:21 PM)TheInquisition Wrote:  You can't have any meaningful conversation until you do this.

Fixed that for you.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes unfogged's post
22-03-2017, 04:25 PM
RE: Logic vs. Theism
(22-03-2017 04:22 PM)unfogged Wrote:  
Quote:I can go on but am quite tied up at the moment.

They finally got the straitjacket on? About time.

Laugh out loadLaugh out loadLaugh out loadLaugh out loadLaugh out loadThumbsupThumbsupThumbsup

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-03-2017, 04:25 PM (This post was last modified: 22-03-2017 04:28 PM by popsthebuilder.)
RE: Logic vs. Theism
(22-03-2017 04:09 PM)JesseB Wrote:  
(22-03-2017 04:05 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  I should have said described. Like I said; I was short on time. And it does speak to intelligent design.

Show evidence that a coin toss is random or based on chance. I assure you it is neither, but think for yourself. I'll wait. Everything happens for a reason though you may not believe it. It doesn't need your belief to be true.

No; alone they are evidence of no thing in particular. You are correct. But I never said it was irrifutable proof. The points I attempted to mention, together, do lean more towards a cause than no case which is nonsensical.



faith in selfless unity for good

Problem is they don't equate to any evidence, as there is no compelling evidence for your god.

And your claim on coin tosses is entirely baseless. Again math describes the world does not dictate it, so any plea to statistical likelihoods isn't evidence in your corner. Also no mathematician would agree with you even if you attempted to go that route.

Your points lean towards nothing, literally, nothing. IF your god existed the evidence would be clear an overwhelming based on the claims made by your religion. The fact that you have to stretch so far to make the odd pieces kinda almost fit your narrative is evidence that you're full of shit. There's a word for people who do things like this, charlatan.

They don't equate to evidence of a cause to existence or order?
Maybe not to someone blinded by their own animosity and motives.

Let me explain something to you since I must have failed earlier. The coin toss is not based on chance at all. It is based on variables. The side it rests on before the toss- variable, force- variable, trajectory- variable, wind- variable, surroundings- variable. What else affects it? Gravity- constant, density of surface coin strikes- variable. Yeah....Uhm....not random, not chance, not coincidence.

Try again.

Who said math dictated the world!?
A wasn't making a plea to statistical anything. So a mathematician wouldn't agree with me that all readily observable existence is too perfectly described with mathematics? You are way over your head little buddy.

If GOD was real the evidence would be overwhelming based on what claims made by what religion? Citation needed.

I have to stretch no thing whatsoever. The proof of GOD is literally within everything to me personally. I just hastily noted a few points that I know to be undeniable. While they don't prove anything; to deny that they insinuate a cause to existence and an observable order, and that these things don't also lean towards intelligent design is intellectual dishonesty to me but, well....OK.

peace

faith in selfless unity for good
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-03-2017, 04:32 PM
RE: Logic vs. Theism
(22-03-2017 04:21 PM)TheInquisition Wrote:  
(22-03-2017 04:08 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Show me what prophet or messenger of GOD that said we are the center of the universe, and then understand that I ,nor my belief in or faithfulness towards GOD are not the product of the indocrination of man, fear, nor gullibility.

As if it must closely follow the errors of man in order to have faith in GOD.

Try not stereotyping people. I have to at times.

peace

faith in selfless unity for good

That's why you need to define your god in a falsifiable manner, so far you have tossed around poorly defined terms while attempting to shift the burden of proof.

You can't have any meaningful conversation until you do this.

I'm perfectly satisfied by saying a supposed god would put as at a very important point in the universe and we would see clear evidence of this. Since we don't see this, a god of this type is falsified.
Define GOD in. A falsifiable manner.

Do you realize this is a fallacy?

How would you presume to define a thing that caused all existence when you can't even define the laws that bind existence?



faith in selfless unity for good
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: