Total posts: 13,796
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
Like personal expenses, campaign contributions are not deductible. 26 U.S.C. 162(e)(1)(B). So no matter the reason the President paid his alleged former lovers, his business could not legally have deducted the expense. There is no way out of that legal corner.
are you suggesting trump claimed the "legal retainer" (paid from a personal bank account) expense as a tax deduction ?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RaymondSheen
Excuse me? What about it? Are you suggesting I'm ignorant of your possible findings in such an endeavor?
you try to invalidate arguments by suggesting they're "missing the point"
but you fail to specify exactly what the target is
this is called
"an appeal to ignorance"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RaymondSheen
Really! And you have verification for this?
exactly the same level of verification as yours
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RaymondSheen
which is what exactly ?You'll know when you get there. It may not be the same for you as it is for me.
appeal to the unknown
also known as
appeal to ignorance
Created:
-->
@baggins
It seems like the connection between theism and theists is very crucial to the debate for them but somehow the connection between theism and what does theism claim is not that important and unnecessary to discuss.
i'd like to give them a hint
all of the sound logical-necessity arguments for an all-powerful creator
are arguments for DEISM
which is a little weird
because THEISTS tend to think this somehow bolsters their mythos
but nobody can draw a straight line between the two
because back here in reality
DEISM is functionally indistinguishable from ATHEISM
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
Key claims of what?
exactly my point
present a theistic claim that is scientific
present a theistic claim that is logical
present a theistic claim that is rational
sure, it is natural for people to think lightning and volcanoes are manifestations of angry-sky-daddy (ASD)
because we tend to project our own emotional states on inanimate objects
and that projection may have some retroactive demonstrable social benefit
but projecting motives onto inanimate objects is not scientific
projecting motives onto inanimate objects is not logical
projecting motives onto inanimate objects is not rational
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
The truth, as was told back then, is that Jesus' parents were Mary, and a Roman Soldier named Pantera. In other words, Jesus' father was in fact human.
The name Pantera was quite common back then, but we do have his first name too.
He was known as Tiberius Julius Abdes Pantera.
This was recorded not only in the Jewish Talmud but also in other Jewish writings and Roman records. In it Jesus was referred to as Jesus (Yeshu) ben Pantera, Son of Pantera.
Jesus is a fairly modern take on his real name. He was mainly known as Yeshu or Yeshua, which makes sense as there was no letter J in the Hebrew or Greek alphabet around the time of the Jesus story.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RaymondSheen
and never get to the real point
which is what exactly ?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
there is no legal precedent for charging someone with "defrauding voters" for killing a story
Created:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
I don't know Hebrew, but I do know English; and some people are making themselves abundantly clear:
how is "from the river to the sea" somehow evil when one person says it, but not when another person says it ?
wipe them off the f*ing map
orthodox jews
a balanced view
Created:
-->
@cristo71
I have come to the conclusion that they dream of living in a world devoid of Jews and a Jewish homeland— even if it means the destruction of their own earthly lives and the lives of their children, sadly.I’m not sure what needs clarification. Can you be more specific about what words or phrases are unclear?
are you suggesting it's ok to slaughter all palestinians because many of them hate jews
but it's not ok to slaughter all jews because many of them hate palestinians ?
Created:
-->
@baggins
Fair meaning that its fair to say anything is possible?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RaymondSheen
The Dogon tribe in Africa is known for their knowledge of the Sirius star system, which includes a binary star as Sirius A and Sirius B.
i guess that proves they worship the one true creator of all things
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
Yes, if X=3, Y=2 ,Z=1, and W=49(3x2)/1 X sqrt 49= 6 x 7= 42
true based on these conditions
what about this one
god + objective-truth + moral-principle + bible = universal-morality
would you call this a "true statement" ?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Paying to keep a story out of the public for the purpose (mind reader) of winning election sure sounds to me like a campaign expenditure. Not a lawyer here, but I fail to see how it is not.
if you're arnold schwarzenegger it's not a campaign expenditure
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
(X+Y)/Z x sq.rt.(W) = 42
would you call this a "true statement" ?
Created:
-->
@baggins
Fair meaning that its fair to say anything is possible?
it does appear that proto-religious beliefs were effective social scaffolding that aided human survival
and i think it could be argued "possibly essential"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
One equation allows you to determine only one unknown value. It is a fundamental rule that you need as many equations as you have unknown values. Four unknowns means that we need four equations to solve the problem.
right
this example is supposed to illustrate how ridiculous logically incoherent arguments can be
like this one
god + objective-truth + moral-principle + bible = universal-morality
god = undefined variable
objective-truth = undefined variable
moral-principle = undefined variable
bible = undefined variable
universal-morality = undefined variable
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
(X+Y)/Z x sq.rt.(W) = 42
this is a good example of motivated-reasoning
also known as
putting the horse before the cart
also known as
confirmation bias
also known as
cherry-picking data to support a foregone conclusion
prejudiced reasoning
also known as
failure to solve undefined variables
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RaymondSheen
Description: Not believed inProphecy: Isaiah 53:1Fulfillment: John 12:37, 38
i verified one unverifiable written statement from an old book
with another unverifiable written statement from an old book
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Nope nothing there concerning Jesus . And lets not forget, the messiah was never supposed to have died . He was supposed to have freed the Jews from the Roman yoke, FAIL. Inherited the throne of David, FAIL . Become king of the Jews, FAIL. And bring peace to all earth, FAIL and many other things that was expected of the messiah. In fact, a careful read of the New Testamant, and one can see that between John the Baptist and Jesus, it appears that John was more a Messiah like figure than Jesus ever was. But he was executed too, (Twice!!!) if the bible is to be believed.
well stated
Created:
-->
@cristo71
Wouldn’t you say it is possible that the human species has been selected by evolution for a predilection toward spiritualism?
that seems fair to say
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
The ones you convince would spread your message further, thus the society of criminals would gradually be eroded.
When there are many restrictions in the world
The people become more impoverished
When people have many sharp weapons
The country becomes more chaotic
When people have many clever tricks
More strange things occur
The more laws are posted
The more robbers and thieves there are
Created:
Posted in:
no claim is automatically logical
in order for a claim to be considered logical, it must be demonstrated and each component defined
for example
something plus something divided by something and then multiplied by the square-root of something = 42
you can't prove me wrong - so it must be true
if you don't believe me then you are just denying mathematical facts
Created:
-->
@Sidewalker
It is mycontention that the belief that Theism is illogical, irrational, andunscientific is a strictly unfounded and faith-based belief, it is not based onlogic, reason, or science, and consequently, rather than Theism, it is thatbelief itself that is illogical, irrational, and unscientific.
no claim is automatically logical
in order for a claim to be considered logical, it must be demonstrated and each component defined
for example
something plus something divided by something and then multiplied by the square-root of something = 42
you can't prove me wrong - so it must be true
if you don't believe me then you are just denying mathematical facts
Created:
-->
@Sidewalker
The things science studies do not“come from” science, they come from observation, experiment, and analysis.Consequently, the scientific evaluation of Theism is necessarily a matter ofobservation of Theism, and what we observe is these guys talking about God, butunable to define God.
you're describing anthropology
Created:
-->
@Sidewalker
The Theistic belief that there is atranscendent Spiritual dimension to reality is not refuted by science, andtherefore, it is not “unscientific” any more than dark matter or dark energyare unscientific because they are immaterial at best, and we do not know whattheir nature is.
an extremely general and broadly UNdefined "theistic belief" (is) "unscientific" because it is not rigorously defined, observable, testable, falsifiable data
science is not a belief
science is a method of collecting and validating OBSERVABLE data
Created:
-->
@Sidewalker
Physicalism is not supported by science,
nobody nowhere believes in "physicalism" in this way
nobody nowhere disbelieves in the concept of "speed"
nobody nowhere disbelieves in the concept of "heat"
nobody nowhere disbelieves in the concept of "gravity"
Created:
-->
@Sidewalker
If you are saying this because of amistaken belief that science doesn’t deal with immaterial things, that is physicalism and it is simply misguided. In science there are plenty of thingsthat are not physical,
everything scientifically observable
is by definition
measurable, quantifiable
Created:
-->
@Sidewalker
The simple fact is that science hasnever found a single non-spiritual society of human beings anywhere or at anytime in history. The experience of thesacred, the common experiential reality of human beings we refer to asSpiritual, is common to all peoples in all times, and it appears to have beenreached independently among peoples and cultures that did not have contact withone another. This certainly leads one to logically conclude that a Spiritualorientation is the natural state of human beings. It is fair to say thathumanity is innately spiritual, which is to say, spirituality is the naturalorienting response to human experience.
if this premise is accepted
then every "spiritual belief" is equally true
are you a polytheist ?
Created:
-->
@baggins
we are arguing if theism is reasonable to accept as true
in order to make a determination
we must examine specific claims
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
How would you know that a version of theism isn't true.
examine the logical coherence of key claims
Created:
-->
@cristo71
I have come to the conclusion that they dream of living in a world devoid of Jews and a Jewish homeland— even if it means the destruction of their own earthly lives and the lives of their children, sadly.
what are you trying to say here ?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Till then, the fact that you continue to compare these two while leaving out the actual crime alleged here tells me you aren't well versed on the basics. Either that or you're just being fundamentally dishonest. Either way, if you are really interested in the legal theory here I suggest you spend some time googling it instead of pressing me to explain it even though I've said multiple times already that I'm not a lawyer and am really not interested in the legal manutia of this case.
look, just to be clear, i hate trump as much as the next guy
and what you seem to be saying here is that you don't want to haggle over legal details
while at the same time haggling over legal details
paying to kill a story in the middle of a campaign is not a crime
it is not a campaign expenditure if there is evidence that the expense would have happened regardless of the campaign
trump paid to kill similar stories BEFORE he ran for president - so it is reasonable to believe he would have paid to kill this story regardless
killing a story is not and has never been "defrauding voters"
Created:
-->
@Sidewalker
Note: Above you said “I dont know what a“spirit” is”, and here you are referring matter of factly to “anythingspiritual or a spirit”, so I think you have conceded that one can certainlydiscuss the concept of Spirit without being able to explicitly know it’snature. Minimally, you can define spiritas what you are talking about here, and then define God as that thing thoseTheists are talking about over there.
keep insisting on undefined terms
that's your best tactic
Created:
-->
@Sidewalker
It’s not supposed to be easy, yourargument comes down to saying that the vast majority of mankind is, and alwayshas been, unscientific, illogical, and irrational,
just on this one specific topic
of course there are plenty of christian scientists and engineers and doctors and lawyers
Created:
-->
@cristo71
Do you find non-sequiturs somehow compelling?
please explain to me exactly which women and children we are morally obligated to slaughter
Created:
-->
@Sidewalker
When you observe the use of the word God by Theists, we cansee that it is used to evoke and sustain a way of seeing the world which cannotbe expressed in any other way. The wordGod is used in many ways, but primarily to evoke a certain dispositional set ofresponses to human experiences, and to express the personal nature of thoseexperiences. This is the basis upon which I will logically and scientifically be arguing that Theism is a rational position to take.
so, basically GNOSIS
Created:
-->
@Sidewalker
Nobody thinks of God as an object and attemptsto dispute existence by insisting we objectively define the term negates theprimary concept of transcendence which is at the core of Theism. For logical or scientific understanding, we get nowhere debating what the word“God” stands for, we must look at “How is it used?” if we want to understand itlogically or scientifically. Evaluating the concept of God in that way allows logicaland scientific standards of observation and evidence to be applied.
you could simply say "god" is incomprehensible and inconceivable
Created:
-->
@Sidewalker
Theism refers to God as a “Spirit”, most commonly described as "transcendent", so arguments about defining/describing God are foolish,
you literally just defined/described "god"
Created:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
but he doesn't win in a three way and you can't get Biden out of the way because the deep state wants his compliant decaying brain right where it is.
yeah, but 99% of people are only voting for biden because they don't want trump to win
but if everyone knows biden can't win
and RFK can beat trump
then NOBODY will vote for biden
Created:
-->
@cristo71
Sounds like a conversation Hamas might have had prior to October 7. Do you believe that was a false flag operation or something?
i'm on your side now
can we start slaughtering all the terrorists in prisons now ?
and their families ?
or just the ones in gaza and the west bank ?
don't forget about the west bank
nuke the taliban, they're all terrorists right ?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Basically if you went out to buy an apple, they'll claim you're trying to illegally hide campaign spending because if you don't eat you'll look unhealthy on camera and that might hurt your chances. If you said "I would have bought that apple anyway" they're saying "No you would buy something unhealthy like a snickers bar, our jury will decide these matters".
ok, i wasn't sure which side of this you were trying to represent
Created:
-->
@baggins
I won’t mind responding to other people as well but I would appreciate if comments are made after me and Sidewalker are done debating so there are not a lot of distractions or change of the course of the conversation or the topic itself. Thanks.
not to throw a monkey-wrench into things
but i'm not sure any belief is "scientific"
science is simply a method for gathering and processing and verifying data
people sometimes colloquially employ the term "scientific conclusions" but this is very misleading
even the best data can be interpreted multiple ways
conclusions are never "scientific"
only the data and the method of processing and verifying the data can be considered scientific
Created:
-->
@baggins
Can I safely assume that you answered your own question?
i'm genuinely curious if you can map it out
Created:
-->
@baggins
At best it can lead you to the conclusion that you dont know because this might be a simulation and Im actually a figment of your imagination and if you believe that I am whats the point in even talking to me.
do you enjoy dreams ?
Created:
-->
@baggins
The claim that our "inner conclusions are a reasonably accurate interpretation" of this external signaling is a bold assumption. Our senses and cognitive biases are known to distort and misinterpret information, so the accuracy of our internal models of reality is far from guaranteed. This only shows we cannot trust our personal experiences and they don’t represent reality. Nothing about this favors any arguments for theism since most of them are based on personal experiences.
NOUMENON
Created:
-->
@baggins
Regardless of the nature of reality, the scientific method remains our best tool for understanding the world today.Even in a simulated universe, the principles of empiricism, logic and methodological naturalism would still be the most reliable path to knowledge. And even if we are in a simulation universe that does not point in any way to divine creator. The simulation can have natural or non theistic origins.
well stated
Created:
-->
@baggins
And if you say that the external reality is simulation too then there must still be an underlying reality that still begs the same questions. This philosophical idea lacks empirical evidence to support it as a comprehensive explanation of reality. It cant be tested or falsified - without that, it remains speculation rather than a reasonable theory.
ok, this is interesting
Created: