What does the word ‘god’ refer to?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-10-2016, 02:12 AM
RE: What does the word ‘god’ refer to?
(12-10-2016 09:20 AM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  I think that has more to do with your inability to listen to what people are ACTUALLY saying instead of trying to tell them what they think and believe.
Rational people all over their world change and modify what they believe all the time based on the evidence. Your inability to do is is exactly what makes you irrational and hold irrational beliefs.

I guess, you mean evidences that are presented on the modern bible... right?

Sorry, I am afraid that you are my guest when you CAN share with me your personal observations on the ground and/or your personal analyses about them only.
Otherwise, I already know most of the great audio/visual international proofs and comments by which the modern bible tries the best methods to convince the world about anything that the men on bottom on the planet earth are supposed to believe, mainly about the important events... as of the modern terror in the endless daily episodes of the international series "War on Terror".

So as long you cannot realise that the internet and the TV news (and alike) are like a new bible written and supervised by the most powerful/rich sides (religious and political) in the world, you have no choice but taking it (this bible) as the inerrant Word of Nature instead of the Word of God presented on the holy books that are made for the formal theists (also with the full support of powerful/rich groups, claiming being religious).

Facts that don't need evidences:
Sheep for milk live in peace because it is the will of their rich owners.
Dogs obeying rich masters deserve much better food and shelters than free dogs do.
Whoever has ears will hear.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-10-2016, 08:54 AM
RE: What does the word ‘god’ refer to?
(13-10-2016 01:52 AM)KerimF Wrote:  Don't you see?
While I fully understand your situation (as an atheist in the least), you seem not getting the natural rule that, in vain, I try reminding you of.
Oh I see quite well thank you very much: you are making up shit about a thing you have zero evidence for and you're expecting me to play along with your nonsense. I'm not going to be doing that.
You have no evidence of any kind to support your baseless assertion that souls exist, and until you provide some you DO NOT get to argue as if you have already met your burden of proof. Full stop end of story.

(13-10-2016 01:52 AM)KerimF Wrote:  It is not bad at all if you don't perceive in you a soul that has its own set of rules in order to survive. So, you are somehow lucky that you have a human living flesh only to feed and to take care of properly in order to let it fulfil its role in serving the world/life in a way or another.
Lovely, now you are just completely ignoring everything I have said and regurgitating the same bullshit you have repeatedly failed to demonstrate. Not interested. That's a nice little pile of brainless assertions you have there...be shame if you had to fucking prove them eh?

(13-10-2016 01:52 AM)KerimF Wrote:  This explains why your mind can believe (imagine) that super-individual-men, good or bad, could exist in the world (as the existence of a dictator in Syria).
1.) I STILL don't give a fuck about your view of global politics. It's very clear you don't know a goddamn thing about the subject.
2.) I don't call dictators "supermen" nor would I ever. there is utterly nothing special about them.
3.) I don't "believe" dictators exist, I KNOW dictators exist, and they always have. You ignored my question (surprise fucking surprise). Did Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot exist? Simple yes or no there Kerim.
4.) As for Syria's dictator, numerous reputable, reliable, and independent sources have provided clear, demonstrable evidence of abuse by Assad and his government. Other than your child like bitching about the internet, baseless assertion that I can't trust anything I don't see myself (which is nonsense) you have provided me with absolutely NO data, evidence, or even arguments to make me think that they are wrong or intentionally misleading people.
If you dispute the claims by human rights Watch or Amnesty International then by all means go ahead and attack their claims. What You are not going to be aloud to do is say that anything written anywhere can be hand waved away. You are proposing a global spanning conspiracy of EVERY single journalist, EVERY physician, EVERY major government, for decades. Which is just idiotic.
It's just far more likely that that rat faced piece of shit Assad is just an other power hungry asshole like we have seen throughout history.

(13-10-2016 01:52 AM)KerimF Wrote:  On my side and since I perceive a soul in me (so I don't need anyone to prove me it exists in me).
I'm not trying to prove to you that your soul does or doesn't exist, YOU have to prove to US that it does if your going to make claims about it and use them in a debate. Burden of proof kiddo, you have it.

(13-10-2016 01:52 AM)KerimF Wrote:  my mind discovered that an individual superman (or a super being) on earth or in heaven doesn't (cannot) exist.
Ya well you ignorant motherfucker I'm not arguing for the existence of a super being, just a regular dictator so once again i have to say I'm beginning to lose my patience with your word game bullshit.
Dictators exist. They have existed throughout human human history and your childish ability to pretend that they don't isn't worth discussing.

(13-10-2016 01:52 AM)KerimF Wrote:  Now you know why I agree that God (as a supernatural ruling being, much like a heavenly dictator) doesn't (cannot, logically speaking) exist, also in my reality.
I swear to fuck that the theme of this post could be "As I already said" because as I already fucking said you do not get to assign properties to a thing until AFTER you can show it exists.

(13-10-2016 01:52 AM)KerimF Wrote:  So while you are free to tell me I am wrong because we have to perceive our beings differently....
No you are wrong because you are DEMONSTRABLY wrong. You refuse to meet your burden of proof, you make claims and never try to demonstrate them, you use conspiracy theory as an excuse to not answer questions, you are dishonest in the extreme, you evade questions over and over (even when they are posted in big fucking letters you can't miss), you repeatedly try to tell other people what they think despite numerous requests that you stop, and you are irrational in almost every belief you have expressed here.

You have been give multiple opportunities to demonstrate that what you believe has a basis in fact and reality and you have failed every single time. I'm not interested in your fucking assertions boy. I'm not interested in your ignorant conspiracy theories. I care about evidence, you have NONE so I can rationally reject everything you say as a product of your imagination.

You are twice my age but you have less than half my sense and that's just sad.

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like WhiskeyDebates's post
13-10-2016, 09:12 AM (This post was last modified: 13-10-2016 12:22 PM by WhiskeyDebates.)
RE: What does the word ‘god’ refer to?
(13-10-2016 02:12 AM)KerimF Wrote:  I guess, you mean evidences that are presented on the modern bible... right?
Ya you need to shut the fuck up with that "modern bible" bullshit right now. You don't get to entirely dismiss decades of scientific and journalistic findings because it's the only way to maintain your personal bubble of ignorance.
If you have a problem with their findings than you can point out the flaws in their findings or their methodology. Until then you can shut your bloody mouth on the subject 'cause I ain't interested.

(13-10-2016 01:52 AM)KerimF Wrote:  Sorry, I am afraid that you are my guest when you CAN share with me your personal observations on the ground and/or your personal analyses about them only.
Nope wrong. It's not logically or rationally necessary for each individual to have to be there and witnessing things in person. We have trained experts for a reason, and I don't share your idiotic world view that all journalists are working in a grand conspiracy over multiple decades to make Assad look bad. You have provided no evidence to support your wild claim and thus they are dismissed as fantasy. I'm going to trust Amnesty international with a clear and documented history of accurately reporting waaaaay before I trust some asshole on the internet who pretends dictators don't exist and can't answer basic fucking questions.

Secondly how fucking stupid are you? You talk and talk and talk about 9/11 yet SOMEHOW I doubt you were there to give me your uninformed personal opinion on the events that day. Were you in the White house during their meetings after that?

(13-10-2016 01:52 AM)KerimF Wrote:  Otherwise, I already know most of the great audio/visual international proofs and comments by which the modern bible tries the best methods to convince the world about anything that the men on bottom on the planet earth are supposed to believe, mainly about the important events... as of the modern terror in the endless daily episodes of the international series "War on Terror".
Word salad, and I'm not interested. How many goddamn times do I have to tell you we are talking about how your god is imaginary. I've indulged your off-topic bullshit in this post a little more than I should and that's my fault. That said I still haven't forgotten that you are hiding from my question like a coward.

(13-10-2016 01:52 AM)KerimF Wrote:  So as long you cannot realise that the internet and the TV news (and alike) are like a new bible blah blah blah
That's your opinion, an irrational one you have failed to provide any support for other than assertions. You have not backed up a single thing you have said. Not one. Does that even remotely bother you? I'm not naive enough to believe that the news is right all of the time, but I'm not stupid/crazy enough to believe that reports confirmed independently from multiple sources are not reliable information.
You do NOT get to dismiss all evidence you don't like just because it was reported on the news. Not how rational debate works. You are welcome to show counter evidence but somehow I get the feeling you would rather repeat your nonsense in the hopes that repetition can take the place of facts.

(13-10-2016 01:52 AM)KerimF Wrote:  you have no choice but taking it (this bible) as the inerrant Word of Nature instead of the Word of God presented on the holy books that are made for the formal theists (also with the full support of powerful/rich groups, claiming being religious).
No what I will actually do is continue to reject your notion of god as a delusion, as a myth, and as a product of your imagination because until you have some evidence to the contrary that's what it is to rational people who actually care about the truth. You are welcome to continue believing irrational things to your hearts content though.

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes WhiskeyDebates's post
13-10-2016, 04:07 PM (This post was last modified: 13-10-2016 04:14 PM by KerimF.)
RE: What does the word ‘god’ refer to?
(13-10-2016 09:12 AM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  
(13-10-2016 02:12 AM)KerimF Wrote:  I guess, you mean evidences that are presented on the modern bible... right?
Ya you need to shut the fuck up with that "modern bible" bullshit right now. You don't get to entirely dismiss decades of scientific and journalistic findings because it's the only way to maintain your personal bubble of ignorance.
If you have a problem with their findings than you can point out the flaws in their findings or their methodology. Until then you can shut your bloody mouth on the subject 'cause I ain't interested.

(13-10-2016 01:52 AM)KerimF Wrote:  Sorry, I am afraid that you are my guest when you CAN share with me your personal observations on the ground and/or your personal analyses about them only.
Nope wrong. It's not logically or rationally necessary for each individual to have to be there and witnessing things in person. We have trained experts for a reason, and I don't share your idiotic world view that all journalists are working in a grand conspiracy over multiple decades to make Assad look bad. You have provided no evidence to support your wild claim and thus they are dismissed as fantasy. I'm going to trust Amnesty international with a clear and documented history of accurately reporting waaaaay before I trust some asshole on the internet who pretends dictators don't exist and can't answer basic fucking questions.

Secondly how fucking stupid are you? You talk and talk and talk about 9/11 yet SOMEHOW I doubt you were there to give me your uninformed personal opinion on the events that day. Were you in the White house during their meetings after that?

(13-10-2016 01:52 AM)KerimF Wrote:  Otherwise, I already know most of the great audio/visual international proofs and comments by which the modern bible tries the best methods to convince the world about anything that the men on bottom on the planet earth are supposed to believe, mainly about the important events... as of the modern terror in the endless daily episodes of the international series "War on Terror".
Word salad, and I'm not interested. How many goddamn times do I have to tell you we are talking about how your god is imaginary. I've indulged your off-topic bullshit in this post a little more than I should and that's my fault. That said I still haven't forgotten that you are hiding from my question like a coward.

(13-10-2016 01:52 AM)KerimF Wrote:  So as long you cannot realise that the internet and the TV news (and alike) are like a new bible blah blah blah
That's your opinion, an irrational one you have failed to provide any support for other than assertions. You have not backed up a single thing you have said. Not one. Does that even remotely bother you? I'm not naive enough to believe that the news is right all of the time, but I'm not stupid/crazy enough to believe that reports confirmed independently from multiple sources are not reliable information.
You do NOT get to dismiss all evidence you don't like just because it was reported on the news. Not how rational debate works. You are welcome to show counter evidence but somehow I get the feeling you would rather repeat your nonsense in the hopes that repetition can take the place of facts.

(13-10-2016 01:52 AM)KerimF Wrote:  you have no choice but taking it (this bible) as the inerrant Word of Nature instead of the Word of God presented on the holy books that are made for the formal theists (also with the full support of powerful/rich groups, claiming being religious).
No what I will actually do is continue to reject your notion of god as a delusion, as a myth, and as a product of your imagination because until you have some evidence to the contrary that's what it is to rational people who actually care about the truth. You are welcome to continue believing irrational things to your hearts content though.

Let's be rational.
Do you think for a second you can agree with me on anything I said here?
Certainly, you don't... right?
And I hope you agree that whatever forced you to exist in this life, also forced me to exist in it Wink
Therefore, as it is in your case, one of the impossibilities in this life is that, someday, I can see my being and the world as you do on your side.

So, I wonder why it is so hard for you to accept, once for all, that we are different. And while I believe you are sure 100% that you are right in whatever you say/believe, I am also sure that I am totally right in whatever I say/believe. Naturally, you have your evidences that my scientific knowledge and logic cannot accept while my personal evidences mean nothing to you too because, we like it or not, we are made of different natures, for different purposes in life.
And it is not my fault if someone insists that all men (including I) are made as he is.

So even if we will talk for 100 years Wink I will never say you are wrong. Meanwhile, I will never expect that you will agree with me on anything; unless you could perceive/live it by yourself and not because of me (or anyone else).

For instance, a serious conversation between two, as between you and I here, can lead, at best, to one end only which is the mutual knowledge of each other.
I guess, we reached this goal to a good extent and I am sorry that you have to see me as being ignorant, idiotic, lunatic... etc. Big Grin

Facts that don't need evidences:
Sheep for milk live in peace because it is the will of their rich owners.
Dogs obeying rich masters deserve much better food and shelters than free dogs do.
Whoever has ears will hear.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-10-2016, 04:46 PM
RE: What does the word ‘god’ refer to?
(13-10-2016 04:07 PM)KerimF Wrote:  Let's be rational.
I've been rational since post one, though it would be a breath of fresh air if you could try so sure lets see how this goes.

(13-10-2016 04:07 PM)KerimF Wrote:  Do you think for a second you can agree with me on anything I said here?
Certainly, you don't... right?
I agree with you that everyone is different, however that agreement ends when you use those differences as an excuse to fabricate nonsense and refuse to demonstrate it. I half agree with you on the media, viewing them as frequently distorting the truth to push an agenda, but that agreement stops when you dishonestly use that as away to shelter yourself from dissenting opinions and evidence, or as you have so fucking often have use it as a distraction to avoid answering difficult questions.

As for the crux of your question, no I do not agree with you on anything that you have said that you are unable to or, refuse to, demonstrate as accurate.

And I hope you agree that whatever forced you to exist in this life, also forced me to exist in it Wink
Therefore, as it is in your case, one of the impossibilities in this life is that, someday, I can see my being and the world as you do on your side.

(13-10-2016 04:07 PM)KerimF Wrote:  So, I wonder why it is so hard for you to accept, once for all, that we are different.
All people are different, but that's not a license to make up silly shit and argue like it's real. YOU have to prove YOUR claims and if you can't you don't get to sit them at the debate table. Your "soul" can go sit with the unicorns, manticores, and other myths.

(13-10-2016 04:07 PM)KerimF Wrote:  And while I believe you are sure 100% that you are right in whatever you say/believe, I am also sure that I am totally right in whatever I say/believe.
Right but the difference is, as i have said a dozen times or more now, my beliefs are rational, reflect reality as it is, and conform to the evidence. Yours do not. Your beliefs, as presented here, are completely illogical, irrational, and not based in reality.

Ignorance is not equal to knowledge no matter how strongly you believe it.

(13-10-2016 04:07 PM)KerimF Wrote:  Naturally, you have your evidences that my scientific knowledge and logic cannot accept...
One of the consistent themes of this discussion KerimF has been that you don't utilize basic science or logic. There is no logic in, nor is it in anyway consistent with the scientific method, accepting as true that which has not been shown to be true.
You are not scientific, logical, and you have surrendered your critical thinking. If you have scientific knowledge of a soul or a god then why don't you fucking present it like I've been asking you to for several fucking pages now?

What clear and demonstrable differences are their between something purely imaginary and a god?

(13-10-2016 04:07 PM)KerimF Wrote:  while my personal evidences mean nothing to you too because, we like it or not, we are made of different natures, for different purposes in life.
No your "personal evidence" means nothing to me because that's a fucking nonsense phrase. Evidence is by it's very nature demonstrable, if you can't demonstrate it it's not evidence.
Every goddamn asshole on the planet uses that as an excuse to avoid meeting his burden of proof.
YOU fucking made the claim YOU fucking prove it. Goddamn boy.

(13-10-2016 04:07 PM)KerimF Wrote:  So even if we will talk for 100 years Wink I will never say you are wrong.
That's because I am not. You however really really are, and I've gone to great lengths to demonstrate how, where, and why you are wrong. However it seems that you are not interested in the slightest in being a stronger thinker, you don't seem to care how reality actually IS apposed to how you WANT it to be. Your beliefs are demonstrably and provably irrational. Mine are not, as the conform to reality and the evidence.

Maybe if we talked for another 100 years I could get your shifty dishonest ass to answer basic fucking questions. what do you think?

(13-10-2016 04:07 PM)KerimF Wrote:  Meanwhile, I will never expect that you will agree with me on anything; unless you could perceive/live it by yourself and not because of me (or anyone else).
Are you a motherfucking sentient wall or something? How many times do I have to tell you stop telling me what I think?
I have quite literally given you a fucking blueprint for how to get me to agree with you and it involves one damn step.
1.) Provide some evidence for your claims.

The. Fucking. End.

The reason I don't agree with you is because you have given me no reason to do so but a whole host of reasons to NOT believe you.

(13-10-2016 04:07 PM)KerimF Wrote:  For instance, a serious conversation between two, as between you and I here can lead, at best, to one end only which is the mutual knowledge of each other.
No, a serious conversation on the merits of critical thinking, evidence, reason, the importance of the burden of proof, and the dangers of accepting claims for no reason could also lead to you turning you brain back on.


(13-10-2016 04:07 PM)KerimF Wrote:  I guess, we reached this goal to a good extent and I am sorry that you have to see me as being ignorant, idiotic, lunatic...
If you're sorry than stop doing all the things that make you an ignorant idiot. I'm sorry but you don't get to vomit nonsense all over the place and act bemused when people ask you to clean up your damn mess.
I don't "see" you that way you ARE that way and I've spent pages now demonstrating it as FACT.



It didn't go well. Drinking Beverage

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like WhiskeyDebates's post
14-10-2016, 01:16 AM
RE: What does the word ‘god’ refer to?
(13-10-2016 04:46 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  
(13-10-2016 04:07 PM)KerimF Wrote:  Let's be rational.
I've been rational since post one, though it would be a breath of fresh air if you could try so sure lets see how this goes.

(13-10-2016 04:07 PM)KerimF Wrote:  Do you think for a second you can agree with me on anything I said here?
Certainly, you don't... right?
I agree with you that everyone is different, however that agreement ends when you use those differences as an excuse to fabricate nonsense and refuse to demonstrate it. I half agree with you on the media, viewing them as frequently distorting the truth to push an agenda, but that agreement stops when you dishonestly use that as away to shelter yourself from dissenting opinions and evidence, or as you have so fucking often have use it as a distraction to avoid answering difficult questions.

As for the crux of your question, no I do not agree with you on anything that you have said that you are unable to or, refuse to, demonstrate as accurate.

And I hope you agree that whatever forced you to exist in this life, also forced me to exist in it Wink
Therefore, as it is in your case, one of the impossibilities in this life is that, someday, I can see my being and the world as you do on your side.

(13-10-2016 04:07 PM)KerimF Wrote:  So, I wonder why it is so hard for you to accept, once for all, that we are different.
All people are different, but that's not a license to make up silly shit and argue like it's real. YOU have to prove YOUR claims and if you can't you don't get to sit them at the debate table. Your "soul" can go sit with the unicorns, manticores, and other myths.

(13-10-2016 04:07 PM)KerimF Wrote:  And while I believe you are sure 100% that you are right in whatever you say/believe, I am also sure that I am totally right in whatever I say/believe.
Right but the difference is, as i have said a dozen times or more now, my beliefs are rational, reflect reality as it is, and conform to the evidence. Yours do not. Your beliefs, as presented here, are completely illogical, irrational, and not based in reality.

Ignorance is not equal to knowledge no matter how strongly you believe it.

(13-10-2016 04:07 PM)KerimF Wrote:  Naturally, you have your evidences that my scientific knowledge and logic cannot accept...
One of the consistent themes of this discussion KerimF has been that you don't utilize basic science or logic. There is no logic in, nor is it in anyway consistent with the scientific method, accepting as true that which has not been shown to be true.
You are not scientific, logical, and you have surrendered your critical thinking. If you have scientific knowledge of a soul or a god then why don't you fucking present it like I've been asking you to for several fucking pages now?

What clear and demonstrable differences are their between something purely imaginary and a god?

(13-10-2016 04:07 PM)KerimF Wrote:  while my personal evidences mean nothing to you too because, we like it or not, we are made of different natures, for different purposes in life.
No your "personal evidence" means nothing to me because that's a fucking nonsense phrase. Evidence is by it's very nature demonstrable, if you can't demonstrate it it's not evidence.
Every goddamn asshole on the planet uses that as an excuse to avoid meeting his burden of proof.
YOU fucking made the claim YOU fucking prove it. Goddamn boy.

(13-10-2016 04:07 PM)KerimF Wrote:  So even if we will talk for 100 years Wink I will never say you are wrong.
That's because I am not. You however really really are, and I've gone to great lengths to demonstrate how, where, and why you are wrong. However it seems that you are not interested in the slightest in being a stronger thinker, you don't seem to care how reality actually IS apposed to how you WANT it to be. Your beliefs are demonstrably and provably irrational. Mine are not, as the conform to reality and the evidence.

Maybe if we talked for another 100 years I could get your shifty dishonest ass to answer basic fucking questions. what do you think?

(13-10-2016 04:07 PM)KerimF Wrote:  Meanwhile, I will never expect that you will agree with me on anything; unless you could perceive/live it by yourself and not because of me (or anyone else).
Are you a motherfucking sentient wall or something? How many times do I have to tell you stop telling me what I think?
I have quite literally given you a fucking blueprint for how to get me to agree with you and it involves one damn step.
1.) Provide some evidence for your claims.

The. Fucking. End.

The reason I don't agree with you is because you have given me no reason to do so but a whole host of reasons to NOT believe you.

(13-10-2016 04:07 PM)KerimF Wrote:  For instance, a serious conversation between two, as between you and I here can lead, at best, to one end only which is the mutual knowledge of each other.
No, a serious conversation on the merits of critical thinking, evidence, reason, the importance of the burden of proof, and the dangers of accepting claims for no reason could also lead to you turning you brain back on.


(13-10-2016 04:07 PM)KerimF Wrote:  I guess, we reached this goal to a good extent and I am sorry that you have to see me as being ignorant, idiotic, lunatic...
If you're sorry than stop doing all the things that make you an ignorant idiot. I'm sorry but you don't get to vomit nonsense all over the place and act bemused when people ask you to clean up your damn mess.
I don't "see" you that way you ARE that way and I've spent pages now demonstrating it as FACT.



It didn't go well. Drinking Beverage

Thank you for proving me, once again, I am right and you confirmed it clearly now Wink
In fact, you couldn't be sure I am ignorant (or else) if you personally DON'T see me that way.

I already presented many facts (mainly the fruits that are generated by some important events) on my posts, but you had to ignore them all because they are not mentioned, the way I did, anywhere on the modern bible.
So, if we don't see many earthly facts (happening on the ground) from the same angle, you can imagine the case if we talk about philosophical matters, for example.

Please be calm Wink because I have no intention to convince about anything.
You look very satisfied already with the knowledge you have... right?
And I hope you can believe that, in this respect, I am like you Big Grin

Facts that don't need evidences:
Sheep for milk live in peace because it is the will of their rich owners.
Dogs obeying rich masters deserve much better food and shelters than free dogs do.
Whoever has ears will hear.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-10-2016, 05:50 AM
RE: What does the word ‘god’ refer to?
(19-08-2016 02:47 PM)KerimF Wrote:  During a journey, I met some locals of a friendly town who were debating about the existence of ‘tabolano’; some said ‘tabolano’ exists while others insist that ‘tabolano’ doesn’t exist.

By curiosity, I asked some young men: “Would you please help me know what the word ‘tabolano’ refers to”.
From both sides, they all look at me and said: “What a silly question!”. Then they went on enjoying their debate about ‘tabolano’.

So I am sorry in advance for the following silly question that I should address to the members here, not as a group of people but as individuals:

To you personally and by using your own words, what does the word ‘god’ refer to?

Kerim

it was a dyslexic guy talking about his pet ;-^)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-10-2016, 11:16 AM (This post was last modified: 16-10-2016 07:36 AM by WhiskeyDebates.)
RE: What does the word ‘god’ refer to?
(14-10-2016 01:16 AM)KerimF Wrote:  Thank you for proving me, once again, I am right and you confirmed it clearly now Wink
You would have to be utterly delusional to believe you are right in the face of NUMEROUS demonstrated examples of just how wrong, unscientific, irrational, and ignorant of reality you are.
But no just claim it without any demonstration 'cause that has worked so well for you thus far.Rolleyes

(14-10-2016 01:16 AM)KerimF Wrote:  In fact, you couldn't be sure I am ignorant (or else) if you personally DON'T see me that way.
Wrong kiddo, got that backwards: I'm personally convinced your not just ignorant but willfully and intentionally ignorant based on the evidence. You refuse to answer honest questions, you act dishonestly, your tell people what they think and then argue from that strawman and continue to do so even after you have been corrected...multiple times. You don't read what people write, the list goes on.
It's not a matter of my personal view any more, you ARE willfully ignorant as a matter of FACT. It's been demonstrated, repeatedly so.

(14-10-2016 01:16 AM)KerimF Wrote:  I already presented many facts (mainly the fruits that are generated by some important events) on my posts,
Fantastic, now you are just out right lying. Facts are demonstrable, they can be shown to be true and accurate. You might recognize that as the fucking thing I have been asking you to do this entire conversation: prove your shit. Demonstrate it.
What you HAVE done is give assertions. Assertions, no matter much your believe in them and no matter how much you want them to be facts, are not facts. They certainly don't become facts based on how often you mindlessly repeat them over and over.

(14-10-2016 01:16 AM)KerimF Wrote:  but you had to ignore them all because they are not mentioned, the way I did, anywhere on the modern bible.
Fuck you, and fuck your "modern Bible" line of bullshit, I ignore them because ignoring unproven, unsupported, baseless ASSERTIONS made by a person with a clear and demonstrated refusal to back up anything he says is the only rational and reasonable action to take.
I ignore your assertions because they are bullshit. When I ask you to provide even a basic scrap of support for them what do you do Kerim? You fucking repeat the assertion and pretend like I never asked the question.
I don't have to give credence to ANYTHING you say when you have nothing to support your claims.

(14-10-2016 01:16 AM)KerimF Wrote:  So, if we don't see many earthly facts (happening on the ground) from the same angle, you can imagine the case if we talk about philosophical matters, for example.
I have already said that just labeling something "philosophical" does not now, nor has it ever, removed the requirement for you to demonstrate you claims as true.

READ. WHAT. PEOPLE. WRITE.

(14-10-2016 01:16 AM)KerimF Wrote:  Please be calm Wink
Don't assume that because I no longer wish to coddle your bullshit that I'm not calm. I'm not angry, I'm annoyed because every time you refuse to answer basic questions, every time you out right lie as you did above, and every time you try to change the topic like a coward you waste my time.
If you want me to treat you with respect prove that you deserve it and answer my fucking questions.

(14-10-2016 01:16 AM)KerimF Wrote:  because I have no intention to convince about anything.
Well you are off to a wonderful start considering all you have said so far is 100% indistinguishable from bullshit. As I said before, it's super easy to convince me: evidence. Evidence will do it in a pinch.
However you don't have any, you don't even have anything close to evidence and I'm not stupid enough to fall for your inability to produce any evidence as your "lack of intent".
You got nothin' kiddo. Twice my age and half my sense.

(14-10-2016 01:16 AM)KerimF Wrote:  You look very satisfied already with the knowledge you have... right?
You stupid insipid motherfucker would you actually fucking read what I write you illiterate fuck. I have been sitting here typing at you for days asking for evidence exactly because I am NEVER satisfied with the knowledge I have. That is stagnation and intellectual death. Only the willfully ignorant ever believe they know enough. Which makes the next quote so very UNSURPRISING.

(14-10-2016 01:16 AM)KerimF Wrote:  And I hope you can believe that, in this respect, I am like you Big Grin
Clearly I can't because I want to know what the answers are and your happy fucking pretending you already have them when you very obviously don't. Ignorant. Ignorant, ignorant, ignorant. Arrogant and fucking ignorant. If you are satisfied with the knowledge you already have and you CLEARLY aren't going to read and contemplate what anyone else has to say why the unholy fuck are you here?

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like WhiskeyDebates's post
20-10-2016, 02:00 AM
RE: What does the word ‘god’ refer to?
I understand that someone says "God doesn't exist" because he likely doesn't need to know/discover anything about his Creator in the first place.

So naturally, I also don't need the existence of any person who has to trust himself less than any other source.
Obviously, such a person cannot give me any new idea and/or analysis while I can also access the various sources in which his truths (evidences) are presented.

Kerim

Facts that don't need evidences:
Sheep for milk live in peace because it is the will of their rich owners.
Dogs obeying rich masters deserve much better food and shelters than free dogs do.
Whoever has ears will hear.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2016, 02:23 AM
RE: What does the word ‘god’ refer to?
(15-10-2016 05:50 AM)espace Wrote:  
(19-08-2016 02:47 PM)KerimF Wrote:  During a journey, I met some locals of a friendly town who were debating about the existence of ‘tabolano’; some said ‘tabolano’ exists while others insist that ‘tabolano’ doesn’t exist.

By curiosity, I asked some young men: “Would you please help me know what the word ‘tabolano’ refers to”.
From both sides, they all look at me and said: “What a silly question!”. Then they went on enjoying their debate about ‘tabolano’.

So I am sorry in advance for the following silly question that I should address to the members here, not as a group of people but as individuals:

To you personally and by using your own words, what does the word ‘god’ refer to?

Kerim

it was a dyslexic guy talking about his pet ;-^)

Welcome to the insulting party Thumbsup
After all, every person who considers himself as being a modern free civilized one should know how to write empty words anytime he hears something that was not already mentioned on his modern bible.

Facts that don't need evidences:
Sheep for milk live in peace because it is the will of their rich owners.
Dogs obeying rich masters deserve much better food and shelters than free dogs do.
Whoever has ears will hear.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: