Total posts: 7,093
Posted in:
-->
@Buddamoose
We need to gather Intel about the amber temple so we can plan ahead for it
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IlDiavolo
As I have already pointed out no god(s) is necessary to be religious. There are as many kinds of atheists as there are atheists so a blanket statement like the one in your above post is essentially useless in describing us. Many atheists are not interested in debate but you will not ever debate such an atheist and this has given you a disproportionate experience with atheists. After all unless they offer the information you could be sitting next to an atheist at a theatre or on a bus and you would never know. We don't wear badges or special hats after all.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IlDiavolo
Atheism is not itself a religion as demonstrated by actual religious atheists (for example some buhdists are religious atheists) all atheism is is a rejection of one particular sort of claim. To be clear if you can offer sufficient evidence for said claim I would have no choice but to adjust my beliefs accordingly.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Buddamoose
We need to work on planning ahead.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Buddamoose
Luraxt has tiny hut in his spellbook though and it has a ritual tag so we are camping in style from now on.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Buddamoose
Nope we haven't long rested since hitting lvl 5
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Buddamoose
Magic circle set to affect fey would have been useful during that hag fight.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Buddamoose
Does spirit weapon and/or prayer of healing scale up the higher the slot you use?
They both do but spirit weapon is only one damage die for every two levels after second (so 4,6,8 etc) so prayer of healing will scale at third but spirit weapon won't. Still its like I have four second level slots instead of two at the very least.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Buddamoose
I can't prepare any third level spells until we long rest. I just have the two from my knowledge domain until then.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
Not necessarily. It could just as easily indicator of the brain interpreting a challenge to ones firmly held beliefs in the same way it interpreted physical attack (massivesci.com/articles/brain-political-beliefs-reaction-politics/ ). Also beliefs are not a choice ethang5 is literally incapable of changing his beliefs without what he would consider an adequate reason.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
No we have not. Even presuming that we could be certain of our claim regarding genesis (which is quite impossible given the number of translations and rewrites the account has undergone) being right or wrong on a single point is not an adequate indicator of intellect.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
Shitt you're dumb.
I reject this claim in reference to the poster you are leveling it at. I do not believe you can demonstrate it conclusively on this medium.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Buddamoose
Ok but don't forget that I have third level slots and virtually no third level spells prepared.
Created:
Posted in:
@buddamoose @earth
That or ten minutes to cast healing prayer and I still have a second level slot for spirit weapon before we long rest.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
So you can't say the same for another person who is faced with the same life-threatening situation. Is it just opinion, once again, or is it objective and universal (i.e., applying to everyone?) The problem is that if all morals are relative you can't say it is wrong, or better. It just is (descriptive, not prescriptive). It is just something you like or dislike.
Yup thats about thebsize of it. I would not like to die and so I assume that others similarly do not wish to die. That line of reasoning combined with the practice of empathy (An evolves survival trait) leads me to avoid killing people. Simple as that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
If beliefs are a choice please demonstrate by briefly converting to and believing in Islam and then do the same with buhdism as a control for the experiment. Do worry you can go back to your old beliefs just as soon as the experiment is over.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
I do not have faith I have reasonable expectations based on past experience.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
My perspective as a living being that wants to continue living nearly guarantees that I will be of the subjective opinion that my life us important. That is qualia not quanta.
Beliefs are not a choice. One cannot simply choose to believe something that one considers false.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
Do you know of many people that are rational who don't know of God or gods?
Begging the question, band wagon fallacy, dogmatism fallacy.
Demonstrated in arguments such as the moral argument. Make sense of morality from a relativist standpoint. On abortion, why is your preference any better than mine? What is your standard for "better?"
Better is a subjective view. They may or may not have different utilities but better is not a quantifiable fact it is a qualified opinion.
I'm not the one denying God. You are.
I am not making a claim either way. I am simply unable to maintain a belief in the absence of sufficient evidence.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Freewill is unnecessary to explain any natural phenomena and is not necessary to explain human nature and is not supported by the findings of neuroscience. This does not mean that freewill cannot exist but until it can he demonstrated some how I reject any claim of freewill but for whatever reason we agree that freewill is not a demonstrable phenomena.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
I think we are close to agreement on this issue as we can be all things considered. Let's move on. Did you see my post asking if we agree that any claim of freewill can be rejected unless this freewill thing can be demonstrated?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
A persistent and convincing illusion would be indistinguishable from reality.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Maybe Adam is still naming things to this day. Adam is, after all, another name for man or mankind.
This made me laugh. I do not object to this definition though I would reject the genesis story as counter to scientific fact but the fictional account of Adam and eve is prevalent enough to call it popular usage I suppose and it isn't as though you intend two meanings we are clearly discussing humans.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Under the condition that there is a reality I will try thank you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
That the bible is a translation of a translation of a translation is also true. Everything about the book could be completely misrepresented and we would never know.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
The wording can be and is interpreted in more than one way. There are certainly passages that do not agree with each other. The utility of the book is not currently under discussion since my only claim is that the bible contains apparent contradictions.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
This raises another point if you don't mind exploring it justvquickly.it is my hope that God leads you into acknowledgment of The Truth.
We are in agreement that there is no reason to accept any claim of free will are we not?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
Argument ad populum.Yet the concept of God has been with all or almost all civilizations. Almost all people know of God or gods.
try making sense of origins, morality, truth, existence, without first presupposing God
Argument from ignorance.
you don't know God via personal experience since you don't trust in Him. You don't see how He works for the better in your life. If you knew God you would not deny Him His existence. If you truly believed He would confirm Himself to you in all things. He would show you and help you to draw near to Him. Your life would be radically altered and affected.
bald assertion
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Genesis 1:25-27 and Genesis 2:18-19 specifically.
One claims man was made before animals and the other claims that animals were made before man.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Genesis 1:25-27 and Genesis 2:18-19 specifically.
One claims man was made before animals and the other claims that animals were made before man.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
For your convenience my argument is that the genesis account is self contradictory in that one account claims that animals were made before man and another account also in genesis claims that man was made before animals.
That is my argument. You may address it or not but please stop changing the subject and resorting to ad hominem.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
I attempt to end the wolf with my interobang and eldrich blast.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
I wanted to start with this claim as much of your position seems to rest on this idea.You could not have a discussion on God without first having an idea of who/what God is. In that sense you believe.
Firstly do you believe in Santa Claus, the tooth fair big foot and the theory of atlantis in the same way? If so does that mean that Santa Claus, the tooth fairy, big foot and the lost city of atlantis exist?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
An ad hominem attack is one of the classical logical fallacies. It occurs when one interlocutor targets the other rather than the argument made by that person. If for example you tell someone to go tell their mommy or to wake up or that no one cares about them rather than addressing their argument directly. This often happens when one has no good argument to present as a way of trying to "get out of the corner" to use boxing parlance.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Is it possible to substitute the usual action/bonus action for two bonus actions?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
Take thang for instance he tries to use a fictional film plot to defend the fictional bible plot, that response is not something that can be taken seriously. They argue using fiction that we are expected to believe is fact, you point out contradictions and they handwave it away
So why didn't you say this to him rather than simply calling him laughable. This is an argument. It makes points that ethang5 could address (his willingness to do so aside) though you are patently wrongvehen you say his argument cannot be taken seriously as demonstrated by the fact that he clearly takes it quite seriously. Calling him laughable isn't an argument it is an insult and one can hardly blame the man for going on the defensive in the face of such treatment. It also likely makes it harder rather than easier for those who want to have an actual conversation with him get through his defensive nature since being treated like that since being on the permanent defensive can make other statements and questions, even non personal ones, be perceived as veiled insults.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
I am awake now quite well rested thank you but if your arguments hinge on my already accepting them before you have presented them then I'm not sure how convincing we can consider them. (Someone who already believes doesn't need convincing after all).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
every single one of Jesus' apostles was executed or tortured to death in some cruel way.
I understand that you believe the bible but as I do not I have no reason to accept that Jesus and the apostles were historical figures. To explain what I mean let's look at the difference in evidence for the existence of Jesus and Alexander the great. Now no history is totally accurate s8nce they do tend to be chronicled by the winners who naturally want to paint themselves in the best possible light but in the face of all the historical writings about Alexander that agree he was a great conqueror (an oxymoron in my opinion but that is a separate discussion) the pictures of him on pottery the stone freezes depicting his exploits the statues of him etc one gets the distinct impression that someone named Alexander who conquered most of the world he was aware of actually existed. By contrast Jesus is only mentioned tertuarilu in any text other than religious (faith based rather than evidence based) for example Pliney (who is often sited as a source to prove the existence of Jesus as a historical figure) only wrote that he knew if the followers of Jesus. The mention was brief and it said nothing about Jesus himself (including not saying whether or not his followers made him up).
That in mind I would need some sufficient proof of the episodes you described to believe that they had actually happened. Further more people die for faith they cannot directly prove in the present. From Islamic suicide bombers to buhdist monks, so the mere fact that some men died for something they believed in, while arguably laudable, us not evidence that what they believe is true.
I'm sorry but your evidence is what a trial lawyer would call hearsay.
Created:
-->
@Shed12
The universe is just a place. A very big place to be sure but just a place. Living in Idaho does not make one into Idaho. We are certainly not connected to the universe in the way that your hand is connected to you.
Put another way saying that we assign value is not analogous to saying that the universe assigns value.
Created:
-->
@Shed12
The universe is not cohesive. The universe is a collection of separate things all separate from each other. I'm not sure what your asking.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
Have you tried having a discussion with those of a theistic bent rather than simply belittling them?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
I will keep your posts for now, but when you awake and find someone who cares, please begin to direct your imaginings to them.
I'm not really sure what you mean by this or what point, if any, you intended.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
Your a very silly person and I'm not going to interview you. That isn't even a proper nose it's polyurethane.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
"I don't have to prove anything because I know I am right" does not constitute an argument it constitutes a tantrum.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Things I don't know of likely do exist but if I do not know of them then I cannot have any discussion about them beyond conjecture.
The above constitutes an argument.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
When did I claim to be a liberal or that my beliefs are important to anyone but myself. What does that have to do with our conversation or the apparent contradictions in the bible?
To be clear beliefs are not a choice which is why I cannot believe a claim which has not been demonstrated or that you actually know what a contradiction is.
You understand that nothing I gave said to you is meant to constitute a threat don't you? Indeed if youbwerec"shaking in your booties" I would try to reassure you that I mean you no harm.
Also Mopac thinking that I know things would not mean that I did but if you are going to ride the coattails of his argument you might keep up with exactly what he has and has not claimed.
As always thank you for your participation in my thread though I could wish that you would offer an actual argument rather than the automatic rote gainsay of anything that your fellow interlocutor has to say. An argument to be clear is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Honestly ethang5 even Mopac has admitted that the bible contradicts itself.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
You are under no obligation to define contradictory but if you are unwilling or unable to do so then I will have no choice but believe that you do not know what the word means and as a result I have no choice but to reject any claim that you make concerning what is and is not contradictory. In the absence of sufficient refutation my statement about the bible being self contradictory stands.
Created: