re-EVOL-ve

786 said:
Don't be self-delusional that you succeeded.... I logically killed your arguments...
Click to expand...

I would agree that if your faith based assertions were heavy, dull, blunt objects and you were beating him over the head relentlessly, then yes, you killed his arguments by killing him.

Your thinking of the world is based on an assumption as is mine....
Click to expand...

YOUR assumption is based on a false premise, that's what he and everyone else have been trying to tell you. Spidey never held YOUR false premise.

You don't want to admit it but I do. That is the only difference.
Click to expand...

Spidey can most certainly admit it to appease your childish behavior. That is the only difference.

BTW I'm done with this topic.
Click to expand...

You didn't get it off the ground, it was a non-starter.

Peace be unto you ;)
Click to expand...

Spikes be under you.
 
(Q) said:
YOUR assumption is based on a false premise, that's what he and everyone else have been trying to tell you. Spidey never held YOUR false premise.
Click to expand...

You're just proving my point.... you don't want to admit it......... He didn't held to my premise, and I didn't held to his (and yours) false premise... You're in denial because you're part of a science based cult and can't wrap around your head that your worldview is based upon an assumption too..... I'm not gonna even waste the time with you because your a hardcore cultist.

Peace be unto you ;)
 
786 said:
He didn't held to my premise
Click to expand...

It is a false premise, one would have to be delusional to hold it.

You're in denial because you're part of a science based cult and can't wrap around your head that your worldview is based upon an assumption too.....
Click to expand...

Those assumptions all have working theories that help us understand the world around us. They are no longer assumptions, much to your chagrin. Your assumption is little more than an assertion from supernatural belief that has no bearing on reality.

I'm not gonna even waste the time with you because your a hardcore cultist.
Click to expand...

I will take that as a compliment while taking the below as an insult:

Peace be unto you ;)
Click to expand...

:D
 
786 said:
Don't be self-delusional that you succeeded.... You tried to prove God doesn't exist, and I logically killed your arguments... The last part -no evidence- I think I had this perspective BEFORE you even started the discussion..... Your thinking of the world is based on an assumption as is mine.... You don't want to admit it but I do. That is the only difference.

BTW I'm done with this topic.

Peace be unto you ;)
Click to expand...
Your "logic" is that it is logical to assume some things can avoid logic by being "spiritual" or "god-like" in nature. That is illogical because it is self-referential. We are trying to determine the nature of this God, and thus cannot assume before we start that logic cannot apply. One must exercise all other options before the most extreme hypothesis can be considered, which is that there is a theoretical dimension of reality where nothing we have learned about the universe so far applies, and that this dimension does interact with ours in a way that changes the outcome of events but remains undetectable by any human means.
 
First

spidergoat said:
Your "logic" is that it is logical to assume some things can avoid logic by being "spiritual" or "god-like" in nature.
Click to expand...

No... I said this being is outside Natural laws- NOT that he is outside of logic- although you are using nature to base your logic and in that case he is outside of logic (your logic) because God is outside of nature-... In other words the logic you used is based on nature and in this case he can not be captured by this logic- Or I just better say that your logic is flawed not that God is outside logic- I used logical arguments to dismiss your logical arguments..so how you ended up with this conclusion is beyond me... so what you just said here is complete crap.

The rest of what you said is based upon this misunderstanding...

Peace be unto you ;)
 
Last edited:
Then how did you use your logical mind to arrive at the conclusion that there is a God? If human judgment cannot determine what's right without God, then how can you trust it to figure out whether any experience of God is trustworthy?
 
spidergoat said:
Then how did you use your logical mind to arrive at the conclusion that there is a God? If human judgment cannot determine what's right without God, then how can you trust it to figure out whether any experience of God is trustworthy?
Click to expand...

I fail to understand your logic... 'if human judgment cannot determine what's right without God'- when did I say such a thing- I fail to see how you go to this point.

One we're talking about the logic of God and the next thing you bring up is related to human morality- You're jumping around so I don't see logical connections...

Peace be unto you ;)
 
Last edited:
786 said:
First



No... I said this being is outside Natural laws- NOT that he is outside of logic- although you are using nature to base your logic and in that case he is outside of logic (your logic) because God is outside of nature-... In other words the logic you used is based on nature and in this case he can not be captured by this logic- Or I just better say that your logic is flawed not that God is outside logic- I used logical arguments to dismiss your logical arguments..so how you ended up with this conclusion is beyond me... so what you just said here is complete crap.

The rest of what you said is based upon this misunderstanding...

Peace be unto you ;)
Click to expand...

there is nothing logical about your arguments
 
Actually in a related thread..or earlier in this one You made a claim that an atheist would support rape, so we needed god to guide us morally. This implies that without \god we would become morally bankrupt.


Here it is...

Posted by 786:
I'm talking about the compatibility of Atheism with raping woman- you are continuously trying to bring in Islam- I don't give a damn about what anything else says- my question is if ATHEISM compatible with a society that preaches rape!
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
shichimenshyo said:
Actually in a related thread..or earlier in this one You made a claim that an atheist would support rape, so we needed god to guide us morally. This implies that without \god we would become morally bankrupt.


Here it is...

Posted by 786:
Click to expand...

Please quote me when I said 'so we needed god to guide us morally'- I was simply asking if atheism was compatible. And again what we are talking about now has no real connection to morality- it has to do with God be logical or not? (The original topic is already done, we're on a completely different subject)

Peace be unto you ;)
 
Last edited:
pjdude1219 said:
there is nothing logical about your arguments
Click to expand...

There is nothing logical about the assumptions spidergoat made to support his argument and taking that as a final conclusion, I simply brought those assumptions to attention and in doing so logically dismissing his logical 'proofs'- this process is very logical even if you don't want to admit it.


And just to make sure: We're done with the original topic already, the new topic is the proof against God.... so just want to make clear what I am talking about- because maybe you're still talking about the original topic.

Peace be unto you ;)
 
Last edited:
786 said:
Please quote me when I said 'so we needed god to guide us morally'- I was simply asking if atheism was compatible. And again what we are talking about now has no real connection to morality- it has to do with God be logical or not?

Peace be unto you ;)
Click to expand...

If rape is immoral and atheism is compatible with rape then atheism= Immoral and so by extension so are atheists, its the logical conclusion that we must draw from such a statement. Atheism does not have any real connection to morality yet you would make a conjecture that includes a moral stance about atheism... Someone does not support rape because they are an atheist, they support it because they are immoral, and their stance on religion in no way effects the fact that they are moral or immoral.

Theism does not make you morally superior than atheism.

Example:

Five women were paraded naked, beaten and forced to eat human excrement by villagers after being branded as witches in India's Jharkhand state.
Click to expand...

http://http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8315980.stm
 
shichimenshyo said:
If rape is immoral and atheism is compatible with rape then atheism= Immoral and so by extension so are atheists, its the logical conclusion that we must draw from such a statement. Atheism does not have any real connection to morality yet you would make a conjecture that includes a moral stance about atheism... Someone does not support rape because they are an atheist, they support it because they are immoral, and their stance on religion in no way effects the fact that they are moral or immoral.

Theism does not make you morally superior than atheism.

Example:



http://http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8315980.stm
Click to expand...

Ok.... We're ALREADY done with that topic.... Spidergoat quite convincingly presented his argument..


Right Now- We're discussing the challenge that spidergoat said that he can disprove God- now we are discussing his argument and my response- Yeah the topic it totally different but this is where we are at in this thread...

Peace be unto you ;)
 
786 said:
Ok.... We're ALREADY done with that topic.... Spidergoat quite convincingly presented his argument..


Right Now- We're discussing the challenge that spidergoat said that he can disprove God- now we are discussing his argument and my response- Yeah the topic it totally different but this is where we are at in this thread... I'll change the OP to reflect this.

Peace be unto you ;)
Click to expand...

You seem to like to pick and choose which arguments will suit your point and dismiss anything that you calim is "off topic". Perhaps the argument about the morality of athiests directly contributes to an argument for or against the existence of god.
 
shichimenshyo said:
You seem to like to pick and choose which arguments will suit your point and dismiss anything that you calim is "off topic". Perhaps the argument about the morality of athiests directly contributes to an argument for or against the existence of god.
Click to expand...

First of all I already stated in a post CLEARLY that I am satisfied by the answer provided by Spidergoat for the initial topic.

For some reason Spidergoat later on said that he can disprove God and provided his argument and in that argument he had nothing related to morality.

So I'm not the one picking and choosing- he didn't use it as an argument that is his choice- I simply responded to HIS arguments.

Now he brings up morality but with no logical connection between his last post and now...

You didn't seem to even know we're on a different topic.... for you to be accusing me of choosing arguments is nonsense.

Peace be unto you ;)
 
786 said:
First of all I already stated in a post CLEARLY that I am satisfied by the answer provided by Spidergoat for the initial topic.

For some reason Spidergoat later on said that he can disprove God and provided his argument and in that argument he had nothing related to morality.

So I'm not the one picking and choosing- he didn't use it as an argument that is his choice- I simply responded to HIS arguments.

Now he brings up morality but with no logical connection between his last post and now...

You didn't seem to even know we're on a different topic.... for you to be accusing me of choosing arguments is nonsense.

Peace be unto you ;)
Click to expand...

Just an observation from digging through your past posts is all.

If the OP has been satisfied then why not start a new thread?
 
shichimenshyo said:
Just an observation from digging through your past posts is all.
Click to expand...

can you provide example of this?

If the OP has been satisfied then why not start a new thread?
Click to expand...

we've had too many threads about does god exist or not? i was simply responding to spidergoats claims in this thread.

Peace be unto you ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top