-->
@Yassine
You have still not disproved the flying spaghetti monster and until you do I see little difference between pastafarian scripture and the quran.
A classic: From creator god ==> Specific God
Posts
Total:
1,007
-->
@secularmerlin
You have still not disproved the flying spaghetti monster and until you do I see little difference between pastafarian scripture and the quran.
- Hence, 'limited understanding'. I can't help you there brother.
-->
@Yassine
Blame shifting. Moving the goal post.
-->
@secularmerlin
Blame shifting. Moving the goal post.
- This is some deep Dunning-Kruger effect.
-->
@Yassine
Limited understanding lol... says the guy obsessed with ancient ape scriptures...- Hence, 'limited understanding'. I can't help you there brother.
-->
@Outplayz
Limited understanding lol... says the guy obsessed with ancient ape scriptures...
- Too emotional...
-->
@Yassine
Nice, you keeping thinking you know others. Please try to look around and get out of your narcissistic cage. I'm laughing at that bc it's kinda sad.
-->
@Yassine
You claimed to have evidence that proved Allah was necessarily the creator of the universe. Unfortunately all you provided was a definition that includes the word necessary. If that proves a being is necessary then I propose that the FSM is necessary. Clearly both Allah and the FSM are separate necessary beings (since as you pointed out Allah is not a sentient spiritual transcendent plate of spaghetti and the FSM is) and the universe clearly could not exist without BOTH of them. If you see a specific logical flaw please point it out specifically.
-->
@disgusted
I do have the answer and it is answer not answers. Jesus. He can heal if you willing to believe and obey.
-->
@secularmerlin
- Look, there is no point is arguing with someone when I say 'look the sun is up' he closes his eyes & says 'there is no sun'. Why don't we have a formal debate over this? Maybe then you'll be forced to acquire more 'understanding'.
-->
@Outplayz
Nice, you keeping thinking you know others. Please try to look around and get out of your narcissistic cage. I'm laughing at that bc it's kinda sad.
- More emotions...?
-->
@mustardness
prophecy is of the lord regardless of intention or desire,
Prophecy is state of mind or consciousness etc.
You words continually and repeatedly are of no significant relevance to humans reality on Earth. I believe you know this truth but choose to act irrationally and illogical for personal reasons going back to your childhood that none of us will have ever have the whole story to analyze.
there have been many people who have died according to the word of prophecy, would you argue the one who prophecied wanted them to die?
Ditto my above to pretty much anything you have to say. Your words meaningless ergo not worth the price of the pixels use to present them.
then you have failed, if you have already rejected a voice simply because its not what you agree with, then you have undermined your own experience through your stubbornness. your problem is not with me, its with God and he sees you as you are. There isn't much time left, repent while you are still able.
-->
@Yassine
Sure... why not...- More emotions...?
-->
@Yassine
The sun is not a good corollary since it is observable and no god(s) are.
-->
@secularmerlin
The sun is not a good corollary since it is observable and no god(s) are.
- Exactly my point. So really can't help someone who can't see the sun. How about that debate though?
-->
@Yassine
I see no reason to believe you would offer a better argument in a formal debate than you have offered here. Even blind person's are aware of the sun. It can be felt shining upon ones face. It is an undeniable part of our world but Allah is not detectable in the same way. Unless Allah is somehow demonstrable even to a non-believer he is not comparable with a documented, observable, independently and scientifically explainable object like the sun.
-->
@secularmerlin
I see no reason to believe you would offer a better argument in a formal debate than you have offered here.
- Then it's your win, even more reason to debate.
Even blind person's are aware of the sun. It can be felt shining upon ones face. It is an undeniable part of our world but Allah is not detectable in the same way. Unless Allah is somehow demonstrable even to a non-believer he is not comparable with a documented, observable, independently and scientifically explainable object like the sun.
- I guess you're worse than blind?
I don't care about winning I just enjoy these conversations. I am less fond of formal debates. Even on ddo I did not participate in them regularly.Then it's your win, even more reason to debate
Even blind person's are aware of the sun. It can be felt shining upon ones face. It is an undeniable part of our world but Allah is not detectable in the same way. Unless Allah is somehow demonstrable even to a non-believer he is not comparable with a documented, observable, independently and scientifically explainable object like the sun.- I guess you're worse than blind?
Mon sequitur. Blame shifting. Falsely conflating disagreement with defect dies nothing to prove your argument or to disprove mine.
-->
@secularmerlin
I don't care about winning I just enjoy these conversations. I am less fond of formal debates. Even on ddo I did not participate in them regularly.
- Here is you chance to try a formal debate. Then you wouldn't mind losing either, no reason not to participate.
Mon sequitur. Blame shifting. Falsely conflating disagreement with defect dies nothing to prove your argument or to disprove mine.
- Do you even know what any of that means. Hint: no.
-->
@Yassine
You do not seem to understand my objections. At the very least you seem unwilling to address them.
-->
@Melcharaz
You have the cure for BPAN and yet you refuse to tell the doctors treating it? What sort of low life scum would do that?
-->
@Yassine
Yeah Yassy knows how to tell the difference, a book written by ignorant camel drivers told him.
-->
@Yassine
The definitive definition of Yassy.
'look the sun is up' he closes his eyes & says 'there is no sun'.
-->
@disgusted
- You're welcome to participate in a formal debate too, disgusted...
-->
@Yassine
With someone who can't see the sun and is incapable of recognising a book? Pass.
-->
@secularmerlin
Morality is what ought to beWhat makes what ought to be mire than a subjective opinion?
Do you mean 'more'?
Definition of ought (Entry 3 of 4)
: moral obligation : DUTY
If it is just a subjective moral opinion what makes it an ought? Why should I do something or be obligated to do something that is just your subjective opinion?
Again, if we are just biological bags of atoms why should my reactions be the same as yours?Clearly we do not always react the same. We react differently to anecdotal evidence for example.
How does this statement of your answer the question?
If my biochemical makeup makes me respond differently from yours what is right or wrong about that?Right and wrong are subjective opinions not quantifiable facts one cannot measure rightness.
Then what you are saying is that right and wrong is no more than a moral preference and Hilter's Germany is not more right or wrong than murdering an innocent human child or feeding a poor person who lacks the means.
You can state such things as "morality is subjective opinion" but you can't live by it when you are the next person in line at an Auschwitz. Then there is no subjectivity to it. You KNOW it is morally evil.
Why should I want your survival if your competing deters from my survival?Generally speaking it does not. Humans are a social species. We need one another to survive. I'm afraid this is a poor straw man.
Again, you are bringing a moral right and wrong into the equation that is either absolute and objective or it is just your personal opinion and means nothing to me as to why I should do what you propose. It can be argued just as well that it all boils down to whether I survive or not as to how I treat you. From an evolutionary perspective if it serves my means and that of my progeny then your survival is of no consequence unless I benefit from it.
My Christian worldview has a reason for your existence.It has a proposed unproven reason.
You keep saying that as if it determines the truth of my worldview. There are logical and reasonable proofs and evidence that I can back up my claims with. The claims do not stand solely by themselves as you have been insinuating all along.
Not only this, but it also boils down to your highest authority for that is what we are speaking about. We have to start somewhere. Why should I believe your subjective worldview as right and true on such matters?
I have not just used the claim. I have provided both logic and evidence of the claim in numerous posts through these threads.All of your arguments presuppose the existence of your god(s) they do not properly establish it however.
I only presuppose one God. And all your arguments do not. So what?
You keep shutting down any proof with statements like "it is a claim." I have said repeatedly that the claim has verifiable evidence behind it to back it up. You totally ignore this and continue to create a false narrative.
On any point? Are you sure of no objective certainty on any point or else what you have said is self-defeating? (i.e., You can't even be objectively certain on that pointThat is correct. Paradoxical as it may seem I cannot be objectively certain that no human could ever be objectively certain of anything because as a human I cannot be objectively certain of anything.
Are you absolutely sure of the underlined? You are creating self-refuting statements. If they are true they are false because they contradict the truth claims they try to establish.
If you cannot be objectively certain of anything then you cannot be objectively certain that the underlined statement is, in fact, true which undermines the statement.
-->
@secularmerlin
UNLESS there is a necessary BeingHow would any being change the subjective nature of the human condition? Even if your claim is correct objective certainty is still probably beyond human beings.
Only if an objective source has revealed truth in such matters. If not then I am in the same boat as you are, ignorant.
Again, I can only demonstrate to a logical and reasonable degree.Yeah but can you because you keep not doing.that.
You keep shutting me down. "Prove God and don't use the Bible 'claim' in your evidence."
Thus, there is evidence of biblical veracity.If we grant that some prophecy from the bible camectrye[??? - came to be?] that is at mist[??? - most?] evidence of the veracity of the particular prophecy under discussion but not necessarily any other part of the bible please understand this as I have said it again and again. Prophesy (true or not) is irrelevant to the other claims made by the bible.
I do not understand the words in relation to the context that I have put question marks behind.
Again, prophecy is one verification that what is said is correct and can be trusted.
The flaw is from human beings, not God. Satan is described as a liar and the father or all lies. Does that mean God lied? No, it does not. My claim is that what God says it true.Firstly this is just a one long bald assertion but it doesn't matter if your [you're (or you are)] right or not. Let's assume that the flaws in the bible are from humans. There are still flaws. Unless you have some way of determining thevfkawed [???] passages from those which are not flawed the rntire [???] bible is questionable.
It is a summary of biblical statements. It is TRUE that the Bible does state that Satan is a liar and father of all lies. It is true that the Bible states that God is truth and does not lie.
You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.
He who has received His testimony has set his seal to this, that God is true.
This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.
May it never be! Rather, let God be found true, though every man be found a liar, as it is written, “That You may be justified in Your words, And prevail when You are judged.”
Prove these statements are not true or are you just making a bald assertion? I have offered to give evidence that you keep rejecting and shutting down. Thus, you have proven over and over that you are not open to discussion. Why should I continue to bang my head against a wall?
I have offered to give evidence and most atheists shut down the conversation because they are not interested in anything but their own talking points.So far your best "evidence" is that there may be an irrelevant prophecy in the document that makes the claim you are supporting even though you have admitted that the book may contain flaws and even though books can contain both true and false information.You also mentioned that historic figures/places appear in the document that makes the claim but historical figures are included in works of fiction regularly so that is not strictly speaking evidence either.
You keep labeling prophecy as irrelevant. If someone predicts something and that something comes true is that not evidence of what they said was true?
The Bible does not claim to be a work of fiction.
-->
@secularmerlin
If we eliminate these two arguments what is your third best argument?
You brought it up.
I can only give you a good reason to why.But can you though?
Yes, I can. It is reasonable. Without a Creator what is your answer to why we are here? It would have to be irrational, non-thinking, unintentional, random, chance happenstance, would it not? Answer that question.
If not, give another alternative.
Why can't God reveal Himself in the form of these writings?I suppose some god(s) could but if that is the case I'm not sure how to distinguish between the "true" godclaim and the thousands of "false" godclaims.
I'm not talking of some god, I'm speaking of a specific God. You continually shift the conversation away from this specific God to some other unknown and unknowable god or gods.
The biblical God is the only one I will defend as the true God. With any other god or gods I am in the same camp you are, so let me get this straight, I'm speaking of the biblical God.
They All have a similar level of evidence. The anecdotal experience of its followers and it's scriptural writings/recitations. I swear I am having virtually the same conversation with Yassine. "Oh allah explains everything and you can't explain anything therefore allah". Please don't bother telling me why you think Islam is incorrect by the way it doesn't matter. Islam being incorrect does not make you correct.
The underlined is not true.
Over and over, you prove you are not interested in this evidence by constantly shifting the goalposts and bringing in other gods.
why would all the evidence in the universe not confirm Him in some way?That's a good question especially since all the testable evidence only confirms mundane physics at work.
Which fails to answer the question of "why?" Science is insufficient to answer such questions. Neither are human beings in an of themselves.
prophecy is a claim that is confirmed by history. It is reasonable and logical to believe.Prophesy is an irrelevant red herring.
Rubbish. You will do everything you can to avoid the discussion, won't you?
Since you do not have trust in God that would be your requirement that you dictate to God. The biblical God continues to demonstrate to the believe His existence every day in what He has made and through His word.Are you saying that your claims cannot be demonstrated to me until I accept your claim? That is the definition of confirmation bias. You don't have to believe in gravity for me to demonstrate it to you.
I am saying that God reveals Himself to those who accept Him for who He is, not that He doesn't give evidence for whom He is or His existence. The universe speaks of His existence.
You can't have a conversation with a non-existent being unless you are insane. You first have to believe He exists before you can have that conversation with God. Why would you bother otherwise? If I wrote you a letter you would first have to believe that someone wrote it before you responded to it. By our correspondence, you would get to know more about me. If on the other hand, you denied someone had written the letter you would not be inclined to reply to it. That is the significance to Hebrews 11:6.
I have offered many times to show others that prophecy is reasonably confirmed in history.Prophecy is an irrelevant red herring.
Then it is pointless to discuss this any further. You are not open to discussion.
-->
@secularmerlin
What does it demonstrate unless there is meaning behind it?Humans assign meaning. Nothing is intrinsically meaningful.
Are you sure? Again, your statement is self-defeating. Why should I take any moral meaning out of what you say if there is no intrinsic meaning, nothing to base meaning upon?
Is that unreasonable to believe?It is never reasonable to believe a claim without sufficient evidence.
Again, you keep presupposing and insinuating there is no reasonable or sufficient evidence which is pure nonsense.
If the other hypothesis has little to zero explanatory power - yes.That is irrelevant unless you prove your hypothesis.
Again, failure to explain the alternative is reasonable (over and over again)??? Give me your reasons if you do not first presuppose an almighty God.
I can only prove it is reasonable. The rest is up to you since I can't make you believe in something you do not want to believe in. That, in fact, is the message of Hebrews 11:6.If you think I am able to.just believe whatever I want then you are quite mistaken. Beliefs are not a choice they are a realization.
Realization of what - the universe is here via random chance happenstance? How does that make sense of origin?
the Big Bang is the cause of itself in that nothing caused something to exist which goes beyond reason, the universe is eternal, which begs the question of how we ever arrive at the present, or something or Someone caused the universe to exist), or God creation.Without evidence I don't see how you could ever determine which (if any) of these possibilities is actually the truth. I'm afraid that without further information I must rejectvall these hypotheses.
Yet you cling to an irrational belief. Go ahead then.
Again, if you want to offer an alternative to these I'm listening.It doesn't matter if I add one new possibility or one hundred or none. Without any sufficient evidence we cannot know which is correct even if we eliminate some of the possibilities.
Again, I am trying to establish if you have a reasonable and logical explanation or whether you deny God on purely irrational motives.
Why is your past experience something that is reliable in determining whether God exists or not or can be demonstrated as reasonable to believe?I cannot be certain. If however my past experiences cannot be used to learn then I cannot learn and this conversation is largely meaningless.
And when will you ever reach a conclusion that is reasonable and logical and gives sufficient meaning?
You are not a necessary being. Your existence did not cause my existence.If I do not exist there is no reason for me to believe that you exist. From my perspective your existence is contingent on my being real (something I accept but can never be objectively certain of). Prove that you exist independent of my perceptions of you independently of my perceptions of you.
Keep having this conversation with yourself!
My existence is not contingent on your you. I do not owe it to your belief.
Your existence does not mean that what you believe is right or good is actually "right" or "good."Right and good are subjective opinions not quantifiable facts one cannot measure rightness.
If there is no objective, absolute, universal standard that right is based on then there is no such thing. "Are you willing to go there," he asked? (as he reached for his gun).
Now, if you want to believe you are that necessary being and you are having a conversation with yourself because you made me up then so be it.I've already told you I am willing to accept that you exist provisionally and as a convenience. That will have to be good enough since I have no way of testing "reality" for realness.
Then don't bother checking both ways before you cross the street.
I could offer you my email and pictures of myself and my family if I did not cherish my privacy. Would that convince you or would you still think of me as a figment of your imagination? And if the pictures were not enough I could agree to meet you. Would that be enough? At what point would you be convinced I exist or is this conversation futile?
you cannot make sense of it with the worldview you currently hold.You still don't seem to understand. I don't believe humans can make sense of it.
Why SHOULD I value your subjective opinion on anything then? You are speaking nonsense if you have no way of making sense of it. You have zero means of making sense of existence then, yet you are here. That has been my claim all along. Your worldview cannot make sense of why we are here.
I accept not knowing (even if I'm not entirely satisfied with it) I don't have to lie to myself and pretend I have the right answer I'm comfortable with admittingthat I don't know. Dude get comfortable with it humans don't know mist stuff.
Just use your reason. Can a mindless, illogical, irrational, impersonal process make sense of anything? If not, then why would you look for your answers in such a process?
You would have to borrow from my Christian worldview to make sense of originsWhy would I borrow from a worldview that simply accepts claims with no sufficient physical evidence? That isn't making sense of origins it's guessing at them.
First, it has sufficient evidence for those (what you call) claims. Second, find a worldview that can make sense of it or be left with the realization that ultimately life has no meaning. If you want to believe, then don't live inconsistently with that assumption when someone cuts in line in front of you or steals your food or rapes a loved one - it just doesn't matter. To make it matter implies that there is intrinsic value. VALUE is a personal qualitative sense.
How can you KNOW something is right or wrong unless there is an absolute standard to measure right and wrong against? Do you just make it up and call it "right?" Be honest with yourself and try answering these questions.
-->
@PGA2.0
It doesn't have to make sense.Realization of what - the universe is here via random chance happenstance? How does that make sense of origin?