the God term
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-04-2013, 02:04 PM
RE: the God term
(21-04-2013 01:50 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(21-04-2013 12:33 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  He can't. He believes that he's a true Christian and everyone else isn't. Only he's qualified to define the terms. He's the only one able to set the definitions because he's a true Christian. How he interprets the word is correct, everyone else, since they aren't true Christians have it wrong.

Because only a true Christian is capable of understanding the complex nature of love and empathy. Everyone else is simply wrong, including those people who believe they are Christians but he knows they aren't true Christians because only he is a true Christian and understands the true nature of the christ.
I understand you are being sarcastic. Respectfully, my only concern is that someone else may think you are speaking the truth. Hence gossip soon turns to slander.

[trnaslation -- come on you knew this was coming]

You funny. I just worry Christian friends might believe I'm nuts and talk about my craziness. I really wish I hadn't sent out those links.

[/translation]


God is a concept by which we measure our pain -- John Lennon

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-04-2013, 02:07 PM
RE: the God term
(21-04-2013 02:00 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(21-04-2013 09:42 AM)Revenant77x Wrote:  Has kiddypeeps hit all the logical fallacies yet? Frankly he bores me now. He brings nothing to the conversation except circular reasoning and a few good OOC quotes to laugh at. I will say his determined cognitive dissonance in the face of any fact or line of reason is impressive, yet utterly self-defeating.
If you have become bored, perhaps you could answer a question for me. If all morality is relative, to what in your thinking is it relative to?

Time, space, location, culture, and situation. Abraham Lincoln would be considered a bigot and racist by today's standards yet in his day he was considered radically pro-negro.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-04-2013, 02:08 PM
RE: the God term
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-04-2013, 02:09 PM
RE: the God term
(21-04-2013 01:35 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(21-04-2013 10:23 AM)evenheathen Wrote:  Correct me if I'm wrong, but it just came to me that your argument as a "proof of god" is entirely based on the ontological argument, only made with slightly different terms.

Is this a fair assessment?
I am not acquainted with the term ontological. Having googled the definition I am unsure of all of it's implications. Therefore I would not be comfortable as affirming to it.

The ontological argument is a bit of a tough one if you're not familiar with it. Let's see if I can put it simply in context with your argument.

You believe that there is no greater empathetic love that could be imagined than that of the christ who sacrificed himself on the cross so that us poor sinners might know such love.

If we are to believe that this love is ultimate and absolute, it has to be true. Therefore, god.

It's an interesting argument that's been puzzled over for centuries. However, when broken down into the logical fallacy it is, it is refuted quite easily. I'd lay it out for you, but I'm tired and lazy. Look into it, you might learn something. Consider

If anyone else is bored enough to chip in, go for it.

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-04-2013, 02:10 PM (This post was last modified: 21-04-2013 02:33 PM by Full Circle.)
RE: the God term
(21-04-2013 08:00 AM)childeye Wrote:  I told you the honest truth that I didn't know how old the earth is and then you touted the brightests minds estimating it to be 4.6 billion years which means you don't know either. Next time just ask me to esttimate how old the earth is instead of asking me if I know how old it is.

You are a moron.

***Let me edit this for clarification in the event someone out there may take this to be an unwarranted ad hominem attack. You don't get to play word games without blowback, number one. Secondly, the information is out there on the web, in books, peer-reviewed scientific papers etc. If you don't take any interest in learning anything or doing a little research then you are acting like a moron.

As for me not personally knowing because I say I accept the learned authority of our brightest minds is a moronic statement.
I've read that using radiometric age dating (using known decay rates in isotopes) we, as in the human race, knows that our planet is about 4.54 billion years old. Have I done these tests personally? No. But multiple corroborated experiments show this to be accurate. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiometric_dating

I've also read that the Sun is about 93 million miles away from planet Earth. Have I personally measured this? No. But I'm quite certain its true based on the literature.
http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/questio...number=400

I could go on but I think the audience understands why I think you are a moron.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-04-2013, 02:14 PM
RE: the God term
(21-04-2013 02:00 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(21-04-2013 09:42 AM)Revenant77x Wrote:  Has kiddypeeps hit all the logical fallacies yet? Frankly he bores me now. He brings nothing to the conversation except circular reasoning and a few good OOC quotes to laugh at. I will say his determined cognitive dissonance in the face of any fact or line of reason is impressive, yet utterly self-defeating.
If you have become bored, perhaps you could answer a question for me. If all morality is relative, to what in your thinking is it relative to?

[translation]

Riddle me this...what's a circle? As a true Christian, I of course, know the answer.

[/translation]


God is a concept by which we measure our pain -- John Lennon

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Momsurroundedbyboys's post
21-04-2013, 02:21 PM
RE: the God term
(21-04-2013 02:07 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(21-04-2013 02:00 PM)childeye Wrote:  If you have become bored, perhaps you could answer a question for me. If all morality is relative, to what in your thinking is it relative to?

Time, space, location, culture, and situation. Abraham Lincoln would be considered a bigot and racist by today's standards yet in his day he was considered radically pro-negro.
You are saying that people define what is morality depending upon circumstances. so the term moral is a free floating definition according to an atheist? Hence if a cannibal eats his neighbors child this is moral behavior. So do you personally think that eating the neighbor's child is moral or immoral?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-04-2013, 02:27 PM
RE: the God term
(21-04-2013 02:21 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(21-04-2013 02:07 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  Time, space, location, culture, and situation. Abraham Lincoln would be considered a bigot and racist by today's standards yet in his day he was considered radically pro-negro.
You are saying that people define what is morality depending upon circumstances. so the term moral is a free floating definition according to an atheist? Hence if a cannibal eats his neighbors child this is moral behavior. So do you personally think that eating the neighbor's child is moral or immoral?

Am I gonna have to repost Keanu shooting into the air?

Along with being ontological, since you offer no good evidence other than the bible for christ's crucifixion actually having a divine element, it is also presuppositional.

This thread was recently started, check out the OP. Kinda what you're doing here.
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...#pid295334

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-04-2013, 02:32 PM
RE: the God term
(21-04-2013 02:21 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(21-04-2013 02:07 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  Time, space, location, culture, and situation. Abraham Lincoln would be considered a bigot and racist by today's standards yet in his day he was considered radically pro-negro.
You are saying that people define what is morality depending upon circumstances. so the term moral is a free floating definition according to an atheist? Hence if a cannibal eats his neighbors child this is moral behavior. So do you personally think that eating the neighbor's child is moral or immoral?

You just opened the door to talk of barbecue sauce.

Morality is defined by the culture. Child sacrifices were once common as in the story outlined by Abraham. This isn't free floating. The society defines what is moral.

It's a fluid thing. It changes as our world does. We constantly redefine what is moral. Apologists like you, bend the bible to conform with the changing world view.

Shoo fly


God is a concept by which we measure our pain -- John Lennon

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Momsurroundedbyboys's post
21-04-2013, 02:38 PM
RE: the God term
(21-04-2013 02:09 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  
(21-04-2013 01:35 PM)childeye Wrote:  I am not acquainted with the term ontological. Having googled the definition I am unsure of all of it's implications. Therefore I would not be comfortable as affirming to it.

The ontological argument is a bit of a tough one if you're not familiar with it. Let's see if I can put it simply in context with your argument.

You believe that there is no greater empathetic love that could be imagined than that of the christ who sacrificed himself on the cross so that us poor sinners might know such love.

If we are to believe that this love is ultimate and absolute, it has to be true. Therefore, god.

It's an interesting argument that's been puzzled over for centuries. However, when broken down into the logical fallacy it is, it is refuted quite easily. I'd lay it out for you, but I'm tired and lazy. Look into it, you might learn something. Consider

If anyone else is bored enough to chip in, go for it.
I appreciate the honesty of you're tired and lazy sentiment. So am I and more often as I get older. I do not see a greater Love than sacrificing one's own life for others. I can't imagine the logic that sees a greater Love. I can see such love being disputed as God which of course anything can be disputed as God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: