Run The Gauntlet
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 6 Votes - 2 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-02-2013, 04:09 PM
RE: Run The Gauntlet
(28-02-2013 09:14 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
Quote: While at the same time your standard of evidence for the existence of god, not only a god but your god, is very low...
And again, you must have special evidence since I’ve neither produced evidence for God nor my defined standards for evidence beyond pointing out the above hypocrisy that is rampant among members here.

Again, there is nothing special about reading the postings of a delusional mind. There is however something special about claiming you have proof for something supernatural, claims like this have been made but never backed up. You continually try to lower our standard of evidence by raising your standard of evidence for the things you ask us to prove. This is a game, the obvious conclusion is that you have no evidence that meets any rational persons standard.

(28-02-2013 09:14 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
Quote: Your outlandish standard of evidence proves no point. We have never been able to observe a god, detect him in the laboratory, reach a dead end in science that requires a supernatural explanation, or anything else that supports the existence of something beyond the natural world.
Really, I didn’t know? J I’ve pointed out how the Bible says such evidence is reserved for those who seek, ask and knock… with an open mind not as “I’ll disprove that dirty SOB doesn’t exist!” Wait for it… a post from Vosur saying bu-bu-but I was interested and couldn’t find evidence… before I point out from this very thread how he said he was born an Atheist and never had received evidence in church and therefore… he girds my point. Seek… find.

Let's pool our evidence and have a discussion. Y'all present as much towering, empirical evidence as you like that there is no God, and then I'll do the same, presenting my scant and pathetic evidence that there is a God. Ready, set, go!

The bible does not have evidence, this is a delusional belief. There are many people that were Christians that threw away their beliefs after critically considering the evidence in support of them (which is none). You can say they weren't real Christians, good for you. But apparently your god likes to play games, giving some evidence while not others. If this is the kind of god you believe in I recommend you start calling him Loki. 'Real Christians' are people that never wake up and smell reality, there is nothing positive about being unable to realize and let go of a delusion. This is what we call growing up.

How about you stop deflecting and admit you have no rational reason to believe what you believe.

(28-02-2013 02:57 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  There is no evidence any freethinker has presented in 45 pages for anything natural existing at all, except to define empirical items (videos) as if mass gives them true reality--this despite the obvious gap in logic that IF those videos are "real" they are merely binary data transmitted electronically and "heard and seen" via a computer--they have almost no mass in reality.
Or are you going to say there are absolutes that are true? Would you like to go down that road, perhaps, BB? Are you saying that there is absolutely no evidence for anything supernatural and absolutely, that only empirical evidences have real fabric in reality? Are you absolutely sure?

In short "Your standard of evidence is too high for my evidence!"

I'm done here.

2.5 billion seconds total
1.67 billion seconds conscious

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Adenosis's post
28-02-2013, 04:45 PM
RE: Run The Gauntlet
(28-02-2013 02:57 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  There is no evidence any freethinker has presented in 45 pages for anything natural existing at all, except to define empirical items (videos) as if mass gives them true reality--this despite the obvious gap in logic that IF those videos are "real" they are merely binary data transmitted electronically and "heard and seen" via a computer--they have almost no mass in reality.
Or are you going to say there are absolutes that are true? Would you like to go down that road, perhaps, BB? Are you saying that there is absolutely no evidence for anything supernatural and absolutely, that only empirical evidences have real fabric in reality? Are you absolutely sure?

SPJ is SO ignorant of science that she thinks only that which has "mass", and that which has substantial "mass" is real. You have as usual, presented no argument, but continue your fapping about other's statements, (your deflection tactics). No one said only "evidences" have reality. I said there is no EVIDENCE for anything supernatural, and you also thought we would forget about that , during your attempted deflection, to define "supernatural". Nice try though. Your usual failure, FappingInternetJebus.

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
28-02-2013, 05:00 PM
RE: Run The Gauntlet
Of all the conclusions of the argument PleaseJesus could've come up with he chose number 3.
PleaseJesus You're going to have to do better than simply moving the goal posts.







1 You can not prove anything with out god therefor he exists.



The problem here is with out god you can not know anything, even if god exists.



2 There can not be atheists if god doesn't exist. There are atheists so god exists



Other that it's circular logic, another person can worship a false god, and atheists would still not believe in that false god.



3 If we cannot prove we exist then how do you expect him to prove that god exists?



The argument would work by saying if I reject this much proof of your
existence, then you would reject that same proof for god. Therefore I
can not prove it to you.



4 The forms exist in the mind of God
before in the thing themselves, then they exist in the thing themselves,
and then they exist in our mind, and this happens due to divine
illumination.




I love it when god divinely illuminates my non-belief, which means god by means of remote control is disbelieving himself.



The last end I have to tie up is the trusting your senses part. Which
should be easy because brains with organs to sustain them, to receive
information, avoid harm, makes abstractions/predictions, and reproduce
only works if that brain trusts it's senses other wise it's another Darwin award.

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like fstratzero's post
28-02-2013, 05:04 PM (This post was last modified: 28-02-2013 05:12 PM by fstratzero.)
RE: Run The Gauntlet
PleaseJesus since you will not offer evidence, only asking us to provide more evidence for you to deny ad nausem. This is not longer an argument.



Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes fstratzero's post
28-02-2013, 05:09 PM (This post was last modified: 28-02-2013 07:32 PM by Adenosis.)
RE: Run The Gauntlet
(28-02-2013 04:45 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  SPJ is SO ignorant of science that she thinks only that which has "mass", and that which has substantial "mass" is real. You have as usual, presented no argument, but continue your fapping about other's statements, (your deflection tactics). No one said only "evidences" have reality. I said there is no EVIDENCE for anything supernatural, and you also thought we would forget about that , during your attempted deflection, to define "supernatural". Nice try though. Your usual failure, FappingInternetJebus.

I did say I'm done here, oh well, I lied.

If only things with mass are real, then light is not real. The light you use to read your precious bible, is not real, so how can you believe anything something that is not real is conveying to you?

You should pay enough attention to your own arguments to realize when they destroy your own arguments.

"I see the light!"

Something that is real, is something that we are able to detect, and whose detection can be confirmed by multiple unbias sources. God does not qualify.

2.5 billion seconds total
1.67 billion seconds conscious

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-03-2013, 01:16 PM
RE: Run The Gauntlet
You people write 43 fucking pages about this in just a few days and you still haven't seen this giant TROLL sitting in the room? Fuck me, you guys are blind.

[Image: A_troll_giant_guard_or_sumthin_by_InFlamE4Real.jpg]

I mean, anyone that claims to be a believer, then searches for evidence and proofs of God, trying to show it to others is not a believer, because: proof denies faith! With proof you no longer believe, you know a fact. No faith, no God, the proof destroys God as something supernatural and makes it just something from this world. So there, I have settled it. Now you can all go home.

Quote: "Now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mindbogglingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as the final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God.
"The argument goes something like this: 'I refuse to prove that I exist,' says God, 'for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing.'
"'But,' says Man, 'the Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. QED.'
"'Oh dear,' says God, 'I hadn't thought of that,' and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.

[Image: a6505fe8.jpg]
I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours.
-Hunter S. Thompson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Filox's post
01-03-2013, 02:03 PM
RE: Run The Gauntlet
(01-03-2013 01:16 PM)Filox Wrote:  You people write 43 fucking pages about this in just a few days and you still haven't seen this giant TROLL sitting in the room? Fuck me, you guys are blind.

[Image: A_troll_giant_guard_or_sumthin_by_InFlamE4Real.jpg]

I mean, anyone that claims to be a believer, then searches for evidence and proofs of God, trying to show it to others is not a believer, because: proof denies faith! With proof you no longer believe, you know a fact. No faith, no God, the proof destroys God as something supernatural and makes it just something from this world. So there, I have settled it. Now you can all go home.

Quote: "Now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mindbogglingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as the final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God.
"The argument goes something like this: 'I refuse to prove that I exist,' says God, 'for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing.'
"'But,' says Man, 'the Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. QED.'
"'Oh dear,' says God, 'I hadn't thought of that,' and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.

Dude, that is a really shitty drawing of a troll... Consider

This is my professional opinion as a art major. Angel

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-03-2013, 02:06 PM
RE: Run The Gauntlet
Filox, are you volunteering for sodomy? Consider

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes houseofcantor's post
01-03-2013, 02:59 PM
RE: Run The Gauntlet
(20-02-2013 07:34 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
Quote:The same way I know it isn't a fairy or goblin or a ghost. Whatever entity is manipulating these electrons, exists. God, has never been demonstrated to interact with anything in our physical universe. Therefore, its existence is highly improbable.
Quick win? Not even a point on your end yet.
You ducked the second part of my post, that it might be me, the ever-lovely pj, posting as you.
Quote:The joke of this thread is that you make that a condition for you to provide proof that a god exists and that jesus/god as written in the bible is that god. Are you serious? If you had such proof, you shouldn't hold it back with the price of admission some mental masturbation. A true believer would offer it to anyone. Instead you hold it back just like the tyrants in Scientology. You sir are a fraud and have no proof.
No the point of this thread will be made evident by me as soon as anyone demonstrates proof on this thread that they exist -- I'll give you more breathing room, too. If you cannot prove to our satisfaction on this thread that you exist, you can prove that I exist. And then I'll prove God exists.
C'mon, what a small thing for you learned folks to do--prove that you exist... and then I'll prove that God exists, and as promised, beyond that fact that Jesus is the true Messiah, God and King.
Thanks!
Well PJ, for me to prove to you that I exist, or likewise for you to prove to me that you exist,(I suppose you mean that we are both living breathing humans rather than some sort of cyber-bot computer virus with thinking and reasoning ability) then we would have to meet face to face---and that might be a scary thing for both of us. So, no I think I'll pass. But hey, thanks for the post. Drinking Beverage

“I'm selfish, impatient and a little insecure. I make mistakes, I am out of control and at times hard to handle. But if you can't handle me at my worst, then you sure as hell don't deserve me at my best.”
Marilyn Monroe Drinking Beverage
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-03-2013, 10:03 AM
RE: Run The Gauntlet
There's just a lot of confusion on this thread from the opposing side. It seems like that the standard most of you will accept for anything is empirical evidence, however, there is only documentary evidence for most facts accepted in history textbooks. We have documentary evidence in the scriptures but the authors are taken for biased or as having confirmatory bias. Can't we just say y'all reject every fact of history so we may move on?
Thanks.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: