Run The Gauntlet
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 6 Votes - 2 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-02-2013, 08:43 AM
RE: Run The Gauntlet
(21-02-2013 08:03 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
Quote:Here it is again, for the third time: What do you consider proof of my existence?
More than you've provided, Vosur, which is zero.
Do you realize that your intellectually dishonest tactic is obvious to everyone here? If you don't define what you consider proof of someone's existence beforehand, you can simply deny that whatever we show you is actually proof. That's why I'm asking you to tell me what you think constitutes proof of my existence before I provide you with proof.

Now, would you please give me an actual answer to my question?

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Vosur's post
21-02-2013, 08:44 AM
RE: Run The Gauntlet
Does the Lord of the Rings prove that Gandalf existed along with the ring of power? Frankly, LotR is much more consistent as a body of work than your bible (which I assume is the 2000 page book you reference).

At the end of the day pj you are hiding behind some existential bull crap as the price of admission for your amazing proof of god. Bullshit. You have nothing and you should be ashamed for pretending to be some intellectual or moral model. You are a charlatan.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-02-2013, 08:47 AM (This post was last modified: 21-02-2013 08:51 AM by Vosur.)
RE: Run The Gauntlet
(21-02-2013 08:03 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  And for you big, big, geniuses who "proved" you exist when I imagined you to post a photo of yourselves, how come a 2,000-page book doesn't prove God exists?
How come Harry Potter doesn't prove that wizards exist?
How come the Qur'an doesn't prove that Allah exists, that Jesus wasn't the Son of God, but merely another one of Allah's prophets?
How come Hindu scriptures don't prove that there is a multitude of gods?

etc. pp.

(21-02-2013 08:03 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  The level of intelligence among a theists has steeply declined in recent years. Too much Facebook indoctrination, I guess..
Fixed.

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Vosur's post
21-02-2013, 08:50 AM
RE: Run The Gauntlet
(21-02-2013 08:03 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Chas, your posts are getting shorter. And somehow less pithy! Perhaps if you dare to do more than a sentence fragment or two, it will be intellectually worthwhile for both of us.

I have given up on having an intellectually worthwhile discussion with you.
Your lack of knowledge and understanding of evolution debar the possibility.

I have read the Bible, will you do us the courtesy of reading a real book on evolutionary biology?

Suggestions:

The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution, Richard Dawkins
Why Evolution is True, Jerry Coyne
The Blind Watchmaker, Richard Dawkins
Climbing Mount Improbable, Richard Dawkins

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
[+] 4 users Like Chas's post
21-02-2013, 09:15 AM
RE: Run The Gauntlet
(21-02-2013 08:03 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Reltzik, I read your post fully and carefully. I'll say this, your premises are all based on subjectivity. What if I were to affirm that you don't exist, and that I'm imagining you completely? For example, this is PRECISELY what Atheists accuse Christians of doing with Jesus and God.
My response would be that your affirmation is mutually contradictory. Under the definition of existence in play, if you are imagining me completely, I still exist, EVEN if it is only as a figment of your imagination. However, I suspect that this is not a definition of existence that you're happy with, which is why I asked you to provide one of your own.

"If I ignore the alternatives, the only option is God; I ignore them; therefore God." -- The Syllogism of Fail
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-02-2013, 09:39 AM
RE: Run The Gauntlet
The point you are trying to manipulate is the very real observation of what exactly constitutes "proof" of something. Except we can in fact do so if we set our criteria down beforehand about what it is we are attempting to find proof for.

This is where your dishonest tactics start. You have not given any clear indication of what you consider to be the object being proven. Is it our physical bodies? Our consciousness? Both? You are intentionally leaving out the criteria for defining what is and is not being proven. I can generate criteria for what constitutes my house, and if I leave the definition ambiguous enough, then I could argue that I could never be certain that the evidence being presented is actually evidence for MY house.

If whatever definition I provide is un-falsifiable, unverifiable, un-provable, not independently verifiable, or not logically sound, then it is something that cannot be distinguished from fantasy or imagination.

The second big area you are being either dishonest about or dense about, is that you are asking individuals to provide evidence for themselves, while holding up your bible as existence for god. But he did not write it. This is special pleading. You hold your god to one set of standards and everything else to another. Another dishonest tactic.

It comes back to my point about redefining words, objects, or concepts to mean what YOU want. Like my coffee mug that is god. Where did I put that? Oh yea, here it is.
[attachment=1123]


It may say UConn, but that is just my own language and that really means god.

My mug can heal the sick

[attachment=1124]


[Image: 1048428-Royalty-Free-RF-Clip-Art-Illustr...refoot.jpg]


It truly is an all powerful mug. The mug does not need to prove itself nor its powers. This writing (by me but divinely inspired by my mug) is proof enough of the concepts and definitions I have provided. My mug indisputably exists in the physical world. I can send you my mug for analysis, but it won't perform any miracles for you unless you really believe. You have to know my mug, in order to understand my mug.

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like TheBeardedDude's post
21-02-2013, 09:42 AM
RE: Run The Gauntlet
Here's a start at a (real) Biblical education, SexuallyPleasingJebus. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlnnWbkMlbg
Of course, you are not able to refute not a word of 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
21-02-2013, 12:44 PM
RE: Run The Gauntlet
(21-02-2013 08:03 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  1) Try thinking a little deeper, Hedge. Apparently despite your many lectures to me to pursue my education beyond my two degrees from a secular college and a secular university, you are yet to hear about Remote Desktop. Moreover, you amateur psychology is quite amateur and tame, since I wasn't "confident" y'all couldn't answer, rather, I was looking for an effective and mutually satisfying way to prove Jesus Christ is real. I can't help your lack of sophistication and ability to provide evidence.... maybe I should do one of those cute pictures on my post: Proofs of existence: Zero. Jesus: Winning!

Quote:Just so you know, there is such a thing as a positron, it is an electron that is travelling back in time. We know they exist and science has observed and explained them.

So, on a quantum level at least, time travel is a natural occurrence and nothing to do with your god.
Right. And the whole fulfilled prophecy thing where God "rides" the positrons around backwards and forwards to give and fulfill prophecies (we all know the OT was written at least 300 years before Jesus walked the Earth) is a natural occurence as well. Thanks for clearing that up for me. Like I said, all miracles are actually natural occurences, Hedge. PS. Try a Delorean at 88 m.p.h. if you want do time travel in a more natural (or at least a more "groovy" way).
1) PJ please stop pretending this was an honest attempt to have a discussion.

The fact that you have not answered Vosur and told us what sort of evidence you would accept shows that have no intention of having any kind of intellectual debate.

I gave you the kind of evidence that I would accept, and you did not respond to it, you just side stepped it in order to make an ad hominem attack on me. This shows that you have neither the capability nor the depth of character to tackle me in an actual intellectual discussion.

We see through your pathetic attempt at deception, and since you have already descended to the level of insults and ad homs, I take no issue with responding in kind and calling you out as the disingenuous shitbag you are.

2) Which prophecy is this exactly? So far on this forum you haven't been able to provide evidence for a single damn prophecy that was ever fulfilled. Nor have you been able to answer Bucky satisfactorily whenever he points out that attempting to tell the future was a criminal offence . . .

Incidentally, when a positron going backwards it isn't a positron, it's just a normal electron. I'd have thought that would be pretty obvious even for you.

Thing is we've observed positrons, and I don't recall ever hearing the account of anything riding one of them before.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like hedgehog648's post
21-02-2013, 12:57 PM
RE: Run The Gauntlet
Let's start with proof that a pile containing grains of salt exist.

At first glance, I as a human being can see the grains of salt. My senses could be flawed, so I seek out other human beings to confirm what I have seen. I can record my findings using a camera and also confirm that light is reflected from the salt crystals. Light interacts with the salt. I can weigh the salt and determine it's mass. I can detect how much air is displaced by the salt through experimentation. I can taste the salt. Again using my senses, others can also confirm my results. The salt can be added to other chemicals and or elements to create compounds. Again showing that it reacts with other items in the universe and obeys the same physical laws of motion as do other items in the universe.

It reflects light. It has mass. It reacts to other items in the universe. It obeys physical laws.
Upon closer examination, it appears to be comprised of the same building blocks of matter (protons, neutrons, electrons) that many other items in the universe are comprised of. The values of these protons, neutrons, electrons can be measured and are consistent with other measured object comprised of the same material.

It can broken into small grains. It can be burned. It can be subjected to extreme cold. Again it reacts to the environment of the universe. All of these individual measurements can also be verified by other human beings.

My body, my existence can be measured and shown to exist in the same way salt can.
Alternatively, I am also alive. I am conscious of the world around me and this adds in many new various measurements that can't be applied to salt crystals. Biologically, I am an organism. I have a metabolism which allows chemical reactions within my body and cells to draw energy from inorganic matter in order to maintain structures, to grow, to react to stimuli, respond to the environment and to reproduce.

The proof you are looking for can be attained by the two of us meeting at any location and measuring all of the quantities that existent objects hold. I am certain with a high degree of accuracy that we both will meet the burden of the definition of existent.

However, over the internet, the proof you require from a written text is not sufficient to prove existence.
Existence can be deduced by knowing how a computer works, what must be required for this message to be typed and placed on this forum and examining what other forms of life on this planet are capable of such a task.
In turn, I can also pass a turing test to show that I'm not a computer program.

That's really about all I can say about this.
Plus I have snow to shovel and can't spend more time than I already have on this post.

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-02-2013, 01:57 PM (This post was last modified: 21-02-2013 02:00 PM by PleaseJesus.)
RE: Run The Gauntlet
Lovely, people! All but ignore a long post where I replied to everyone--to harp at me on how the Bible doesn’t prove Jesus is God—mine was a response to the inane “Here’s my picture so I must be exist in reality!” Sarcasm, my friends. Sarcasm!
“How do we know the photo is real?” “How do we know the Bible is real?” “Perhaps this is the Matrix.” The only exception is Aseptic. Now THAT chap can THINK. You guys are SO close to having me offer definitive PROOF of God’s existence – go back and read his post to me and I to him.
I will continue on now:
Quote: Hello.
The Bible, unfortunately, does not really prove that god exists. There are a lot of contradictions (from here: http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/by_name.html) as well as lots of other things (such as cruelty and violence, among other things; those can be found in the same site I linked). Perhaps the nature of god is that he is a cruel person who enjoys making contradictions?
Let's say that god of the Bible existed. Given his characteristics, I don't think that he is worthy of worship.
Chujutsu: Well, you’re stuck, thanks to PJ’s Rule #1 – Just because God pisses you off doesn’t give you a loophole. I say the Bible has no contradictions. You say some. Let’s meet in the middle and say it has 100 Million contradictions…
How did you come to the conclusion that the Bible has to be contradiction-free to prove that there is a God?
Maybe He is a cruel one as you say who enjoys contradictions. Chujutsu doesn’t want to worship a cruel and unusual and contradictory God. Does that excuse your disobedience to God? Cops and judges make mistakes and contradict themselves at times. Is disobedience a pattern for you, a lifestyle? How did you come to the conclusion that you would perhaps trust in a God who fits inside your little box?
Quote: Do you realize that your intellectually dishonest tactic is obvious to everyone here? If you don't define what you consider proof of someone's existence beforehand, you can simply deny that whatever we show you is actually proof. That's why I'm asking you to tell me what you think constitutes proof of my existence before I provide you with proof.
Now, would you please give me an actual answer to my question?
Vosur—there’s hope for you yet. You’re no Aseptic, not by a perceptible longshot. But you’re not bad. The problem is you don’t listen. If you reread your post as if it’s coming from me to you, you’ll know what I go through on this forum. Maybe you will be patient enough to go back to me and tell me what proof would be sufficient for you of God’s existence…? Then we can skip your having to be so darn inconvenienced to prove you exist to me first.
Mind you, I fear I’ll get a long list of what is NOT proof from you. “No special pleading, PJ, no appeals to authority, no appeals to a majority, PJ.” Why I bet you can come up with a list of 100 such errors of logic from all the obnoxious Christians who post here or have posted here in the past. But why don’t you be honest and tell me what you need. God’s pretty powerful—he’s omnipotent in a non-non-rock lifting kind of way. :0 What do you need, my brother?
Quote: Does the Lord of the Rings prove that Gandalf existed along with the ring of power? Frankly, LotR is much more consistent as a body of work than your bible (which I assume is the 2000 page book you reference).
At the end of the day pj you are hiding behind some existential bull crap as the price of admission for your amazing proof of god. Bullshit. You have nothing and you should be ashamed for pretending to be some intellectual or moral model. You are a charlatan.
Yo, D’Advoc8, my brother, that is one kickass avatar on your post. What is that an illustration of, by the way? It looks like some kind of badass Necroscope-werewolf hybrid. Now onto your question, bearing in mind the nature of this thread:
Yes, LOTR proves Gandalf and ring of Sauron existed. No, LOTR is insufficient proof that Gandalf and the ring existed. Yes and no and maybe also. Plus your question is moot. It all depends on your subjective point of view, doesn’t it? I mean, how do we know Gandalf isn’t somewhere using His power from Manwe and Illuvatar to manipulate cosmic events so awesome, so indescribably nerdgasmically delicious, that He divinely inspired John R.R. Tolk-you-know-who himself to make the Grey One come to life. Couldn’t aliens somewhere (you DO believe there’s life not on Earth, right?) be watching New Line Cinema feeds right now and conclude that in an ancient Earth somewhere in the “Middle” of Pangaea, that Gandalf was our greatest resurrected hero who gave His life for those He loved, and spoke peace even to His enemies? Of course they could, but none of this matters a whit, since you haven’t proved LOTR exists or Tolkien was a real person (Have you ever seen J.R.R. in person? There are numerous contradictions in his biographies! His son has changed many of the details! Hell, man, we can’t find two people on this forum who are LOTR nerds who can agree whether the Balrog should have wings or not! All that disproves LOTR exists!)
And, one more thing. You haven’t given evidence you exist, let alone proved it. So you imagined the whole thing and I’ve never responded to you and you’re not real and I imagined you since I am the Architect, the Merovingian and the Oracle. God bless!
Quote: How come Harry Potter doesn't prove that wizards exist?
They do exist – I saw all eight movies on Blu-ray.
Quote:How come the Qur'an doesn't prove that Allah exists, that Jesus wasn't the Son of God, but merely another one of Allah's prophets?
He’s both. And both books say some scary stuff. Watch out!
Quote:How come Hindu scriptures don't prove that there is a multitude of gods?
Because Krishna is still the supreme, overall, diving Lord. God allowed false religious books to have some truth in them. How come the Native Americans didn’t prove a multitude of Gods? Because they had a Great Spirit who was above all the gods.
Oh, and before I forget, you don’t exist, or you do exist, and you’re Satan trying to confuse these good people. No, you’re not. Satan isn’t real, because there’s no darkness in the world, no poverty, no ignorance, no pain. Pain is an illusion! Have a nice day! (If you exist.)
Quote: I have given up on having an intellectually worthwhile discussion with you.
Your lack of knowledge and understanding of evolution debar the possibility.
I have read the Bible, will you do us the courtesy of reading a real book on evolutionary biology?
Suggestions:
The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution, Richard Dawkins
Why Evolution is True, Jerry Coyne
The Blind Watchmaker, Richard Dawkins
Climbing Mount Improbable, Richard Dawkins
Did you give up on me before or after you redacted yourself to one-liners 100 posts ago?
Dawkins? Dawkins? Yeah, he shows no intellectual or perceptual bias in general having to do with any issues that might touch on Evolution. Yeah.
I DID read a real book on EB… Dr. Behe’s Darwin’s Black Box, and I met Behe in person when I helped host him for a gala dinner, and he’s right. So, so right. His bias was he wasn’t a born again Christian when he wrote, but he got to see how Christians celebrated on him while his “colleagues” defecated on his reputation.
Of course, you’ll mock him and me both in the next post, but neither of us exist. So there! Or… not there! You prove me wrong! …or right! Wink
Quote: My response would be that your affirmation is mutually contradictory. Under the definition of existence in play, if you are imagining me completely, I still exist, EVEN if it is only as a figment of your imagination. However, I suspect that this is not a definition of existence that you're happy with, which is why I asked you to provide one of your own.
Very good, R! You can run the gauntlet better than Vosur but not as good as Aseptic… or me… if I exist. Under the LACK of definition of existence in play (not that I hope for a defined term since I can’t even get you people to agree whether God does not exist or whether there’s merely no proof for His existence) I can say in response, “If you are imagining me imagining you completely, you still exist, even if you are only a figment of your imagination. If you are a figment of your own imagination, you are self-contradictory and therefore, must be the Holy Bible.”
Stop being the Holy Bible. Take up the sword, Aragorn, and prove that LOTR does not exist!
Quote: The point you are trying to manipulate is the very real observation of what exactly constitutes "proof" of something. Except we can in fact do so if we set our criteria down beforehand about what it is we are attempting to find proof for.
This is where your dishonest tactics start. You have not given any clear indication of what you consider to be the object being proven. Is it our physical bodies? Our consciousness? Both? You are intentionally leaving out the criteria for defining what is and is not being proven. I can generate criteria for what constitutes my house, and if I leave the definition ambiguous enough, then I could argue that I could never be certain that the evidence being presented is actually evidence for MY house.
If whatever definition I provide is un-falsifiable, unverifiable, un-provable, not independently verifiable, or not logically sound, then it is something that cannot be distinguished from fantasy or imagination.
The second big area you are being either dishonest about or dense about, is that you are asking individuals to provide evidence for themselves, while holding up your bible as existence for god. But he did not write it. This is special pleading. You hold your god to one set of standards and everything else to another. Another dishonest tactic.
It comes back to my point about redefining words, objects, or concepts to mean what YOU want. Like my coffee mug that is god. Where did I put that? Oh yea, here it is…
My dear, uncooperative Bearded One:
God has neither a physical body nor a consciousness in the classic sense so I’m screwed there. Help me define terms… remember, if we define terms, I’ll go along but you have to get Vosur to agree. That may be tough!
Now you can, define criteria for what constitutes evidence for your house, let alone proof, and I’ll agree with you that you have left your house to come to the evidence room, if you can prove it’s your house.
As for “If whatever definition I provide is un-falsifiable, unverifiable, un-provable, not independently verifiable, or not logically sound, then it is something that cannot be distinguished from fantasy or imagination.”
Then we’re both in trouble, aren’t we? Because I’ll never prove God that way and you’ll never prove you that way, either. It bears repeating, jurors are chosen to NOT be eyewitnesses of an alleged crime (alleged because it has to be PROVED to have existed).
Now, you can go to the unrighteous judge and say, “How do I know the eyewitnesses are true? How do I know the forensic evidence wasn’t planted or falsified? How do I know the alleged victims who are dead and buried ever lived? How do I know they were killed—I don’t see their bodies anywhere?”
HEY THIS CRIME HAPPENED 2,000 YEARS AGO AND THERE’S NO ONE AROUND NOW THOUGH THERE’S NO STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS ON MURDER, AND YOU WANT ME TO USE THESE STUPID DOCUMENTS AS “EVIDENCE”?
And the judge will turn to you (if you exist) on that day and say, “Stop wasting the court’s time! You must be a philosophy major—or an Atheist.”
Go in peace, my brother—if I exist.
PS. Wash your mug or those you healed will get your germs and become sick again.
Quote: Here's a start at a (real) Biblical education, SexuallyPleasingJebus. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlnnWbkMlbg
Of course, you are not able to refute not a word of it.
By gum, BB, you’re correct! I can’t refute a word of it! JEDP theory is as correct now as it was when revisionist German scholars used it to sow growing seeds of anti-Semitism and lay a foundation for Hitler’s regime. It’s all true! Unless, of course, the God of the Bible actually used terms others would be familiar with in the ancient world to perhaps—you know—be relatable to them. If He exists.
Quote: 1) PJ please stop pretending this was an honest attempt to have a discussion.
The fact that you have not answered Vosur and told us what sort of evidence you would accept shows that have no intention of having any kind of intellectual debate.
I gave you the kind of evidence that I would accept, and you did not respond to it, you just side stepped it in order to make an ad hominem attack on me. This shows that you have neither the capability nor the depth of character to tackle me in an actual intellectual discussion.
We see through your pathetic attempt at deception, and since you have already descended to the level of insults and ad homs, I take no issue with responding in kind and calling you out as the disingenuous shitbag you are.
2) Which prophecy is this exactly? So far on this forum you haven't been able to provide evidence for a single damn prophecy that was ever fulfilled. Nor have you been able to answer Bucky satisfactorily whenever he points out that attempting to tell the future was a criminal offence . . .
Incidentally, when a positron going backwards it isn't a positron, it's just a normal electron. I'd have thought that would be pretty obvious even for you.
Thing is we've observed positrons, and I don't recall ever hearing the account of anything riding one of them before.
It was sarcasm, riding those positrons. Sarcasm, I tell you! You whole “time travel is a natural phenomena” was so gob-smackingly arrogant and passé in the same moment that PJ was speechless.
The prophecy I’d refer you to first was this one, “And PJ will come and will show you all truth.”
What kind of evidence would you accept again? And it has to be an answer, not “something that isn’t falsifiable.” I mean, no poop, evidence has to be verified. What do you need, a lightning bolt or…? Let me help you, my semi-existent brother.
Quote: It reflects light. It has mass. It reacts to other items in the universe. It obeys physical laws.
Rahn, Jesus did all the above and so does my Bible. And Jesus told us to take things with a pinch of salt. Now go salt your driveway. It exists, but the snow is illusory. Remember, “when the snow melts in your life, you’ll see all the stuff that was buried last winter.” Be careful!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: