The hypocracy of atheism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-08-2014, 11:14 PM
RE: The hypocracy of atheism
(18-08-2014 03:39 PM)diddo97 Wrote:  
(18-08-2014 03:38 PM)Mathilda Wrote:  I don't know what diddo's on about either. If diddo actually bothers to reply then I'm guessing that it's probably based on some word play from Sye Ten Bruggencate that appeals to a particular type of mind that cannot comprehend anything except absolutes.

Sye ten Brugggencate is the sole reason for why I'm not an atheist.

How do you know that? How can you possibly know that? How do you know that? How do you know that? How? How can you possibly be sure that your logic is real logic and that the words you "thought" sye ten saying that convinced you that atheism is wrong is that actual words he actually said?

How do you know Sye Ten actually exists and is not just a product of "your" imagination as well as this board? Huh?!

You can't! Therefor God does not exist because the bible cannot be trusted since the words your reading could very well not be the actual words there....there could be no book there at all in fact.

There for using This little bit of logic that Sye Ten would use. I just proved God does not exist....as well as myself....and you. Nothing exists, there for god does not exists...haha..I just ruined your whole religious outlook on life.


My Youtube channel if anyone is interested.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEkRdbq...rLEz-0jEHQ
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-08-2014, 12:21 AM
RE: The hypocracy of atheism
I'm incapable of preaching in peoples' faces, dildo97.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-08-2014, 03:36 AM
RE: The hypocracy of atheism
Another reason why we know that diddo97 wants to believe in the existence of God.

None of Sye Ten Brugggencate's arguments say anything about whether diddo97 should follow Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Atenism, Babism, the Bahá'í Faith, Cao Dai (Caodaiism), Cheondoism (Cheondogyo), Deism, Eckankar, Rastafarianism, Ravidassia religion, Seicho no Ie, Shaivism, Sikhism, Tenrikyo (Tenriism), Vaishnavism, or Zoroastrianism

If Sye Ten Brugggencate was the only reason that diddo97 still believed in God, he'd be trying to find out which particular interpretation of which monotheistic religion was the correct one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monotheism
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Mathilda's post
19-08-2014, 07:50 AM
Re: RE: The hypocracy of atheism
(19-08-2014 03:36 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  Another reason why we know that diddo97 wants to believe in the existence of God.

None of Sye Ten Brugggencate's arguments say anything about whether diddo97 should follow Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Atenism, Babism, the Bahá'í Faith, Cao Dai (Caodaiism), Cheondoism (Cheondogyo), Deism, Eckankar, Rastafarianism, Ravidassia religion, Seicho no Ie, Shaivism, Sikhism, Tenrikyo (Tenriism), Vaishnavism, or Zoroastrianism

If Sye Ten Brugggencate was the only reason that diddo97 still believed in God, he'd be trying to find out which particular interpretation of which monotheistic religion was the correct one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monotheism

No, Sye says the Bible is the only accurate religion because no other religion can explain the eye witness testimony of the resurrection... Oh wait, that's hbl.

Sye actually says, the Bible is right over the Quran because the Quran says the Bible is true.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ClydeLee's post
19-08-2014, 08:14 AM
RE: The hypocracy of atheism
Sorry. It was so easy to think of that nickname. Laughat Heh. My eyes do misread occasionally till I stare at it longer.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-08-2014, 11:14 AM
RE: The hypocracy of atheism
(18-08-2014 04:36 PM)Brian37 Wrote:  
(18-08-2014 04:00 PM)diddo97 Wrote:  You keep making this mistake. I don't want to believe in God.

The good thing is that you do not have to believe in a god on top of there being no evidence one is even required at all.

So whatever reason you claim to have for believing in one is still relegated to YOU and your own personal desires.

The only core reason to accept or reject any claim is EVIDENCE. Personal testimony does not constitute evidence. Quoting apologist websites does not constitute evidence. Appeal to emotion does not constitute evidence. Appeal to tradition does not constitute evidence. Appeal to popularity does not constitute evidence.

Now all anyone of any god claim has to do to convince the world a god exists is to prove it in an independent lab and get it peer .by independent people, then you can patent the the evidence and win a Nobel prize in science. Bur do not expect me or anyone here to do your homework for you, nor should you expect us to hold our breath waiting.

What's your evidence that things require evidence? Consider

Truth seeker.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-08-2014, 11:17 AM
RE: The hypocracy of atheism
(18-08-2014 08:40 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  
(16-08-2014 04:28 PM)diddo97 Wrote:  Indeed. Your claim that everything requires demonstration is an undemonstrated dogma.

I'm kinda pissed at myself for missing this little mental shart, so I'll just correct that. I never said EVERYTHING requires a demonstration so that's a strawman that you erected to keep your good ship the HMS Stupid afloat.

Everything would need to be demonstrated if every claim was equal, but they are not. I don't require a demonstration to know that I should exit a plane when it's on the ground and not mid fucking flight, but yes I do need a demonstration when a person claims a talking snake tricked a woman made out of rib into eating a magic fruit and that the creator of all the universe and matter and time and energy and strawberry poptarts couldn't find the only two fucking humans in a fucking garden he fucking made.

They are not equal fucking claims you dick holster.

That position is self refuting. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence? How extraordinary? You'd better have some extraordinary evidence of this!

Truth seeker.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-08-2014, 11:19 AM
RE: The hypocracy of atheism
(19-08-2014 11:14 AM)diddo97 Wrote:  What's your evidence that things require evidence? Consider

Modern day society.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-08-2014, 11:21 AM
RE: The hypocracy of atheism
(19-08-2014 03:36 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  Another reason why we know that diddo97 wants to believe in the existence of God.

None of Sye Ten Brugggencate's arguments say anything about whether diddo97 should follow Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Atenism, Babism, the Bahá'í Faith, Cao Dai (Caodaiism), Cheondoism (Cheondogyo), Deism, Eckankar, Rastafarianism, Ravidassia religion, Seicho no Ie, Shaivism, Sikhism, Tenrikyo (Tenriism), Vaishnavism, or Zoroastrianism

If Sye Ten Brugggencate was the only reason that diddo97 still believed in God, he'd be trying to find out which particular interpretation of which monotheistic religion was the correct one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monotheism

How could you possibly think I want to believe in God? Why would I want to be doomed to forever be a slave?

Truth seeker.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-08-2014, 11:26 AM
RE: The hypocracy of atheism
(19-08-2014 11:17 AM)diddo97 Wrote:  Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence? How extraordinary? You'd better have some extraordinary evidence of this!

The claim "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" is not in itself extraordinary and does not require extraordinary evidence.

It is not an claim of what constitutes reality. It is a useful heuristic used as part of the scientific method, much like Occam's razor.

See ordinary modern day society as evidence for effectiveness of the scientific method.


Are you finished trying (and failing) to show situations where circular reasoning is acceptable?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: