The joy of religion - part xxxxxxxxx

[buckshot24]

I don't think that he's trolling at this point.

I think that he's backed himself into a corner and knows that if he starts addressing points or debating properly his arguments are going to fall apart.

Funny that I think this exact same thing about you. You've continuously said or implied that known=not free without, as far as I can tell, a shred of argumentation behind it. You just keep saying it over and over.

My position is that known/=not free and always has been. Nobody puts baby in the corner and I definitely don't feel as I put myself in one.

 

[bshole]

First you tell me what the best we can do is and then you ask me for proof of truth. I will prove the truth exists when you let go of all your assumptions. Nobody with sense pours tea into a full cup.

To be completely honest, I don't even know if there is an "us". I could easily just be a brain hooked into the matrix. How would one go about proving that the unverse and everything in it exists? We have to presuppose that it exists. That presupposition removes any chance of absolute truth. Surely you must concede this point. Only the very religious deny it.

 

[buckshot24]

The statement was that the Pew survey found that atheists/agnostics know more about Christianity than Christians do. That was a correct statement.

(And in case you hadn't noticed, I'm ignoring your diversions.)

What it shows is people who call themselves Christian don't know the bible as well as atheists/agnostics. I know the bible better than bshole, his misrepresentations of it are the problem.

 

[WelshBloke]

My position is that known/=not free and always has been.

Would you like to back that position up?

 

[buckshot24]

Would you like to back that position up?

You are trying to make that identity. Burden of proof and all says you need to do that.

 

[soulcougher73]

Power is irrelevant, that's why. Having the power to do something isn't sufficient reason to actually do it.

bshole made assertions about a certain text says then when challenged just plowed forward with further misrepresentations. This is dishonest argumentation and I don't need to deal with those kinds of people, so he's on ignore.

You, on the other hand have made assertions that you won't back up as well. Namely, that origin of life is "pretty well understood" which just so happens to be about the most ridiculous lie or sign of incompetence I've read in quite some time. I really would like you to explain yourself so we can determine if you were lying or just had no clue.

Is there anyone at this point you dont have on ignore? Someone challenges you, and instead of defending your position or conceding the point, you just ignore them. That is what 2 year olds do.

Edit: Im probably on ignore so he wont see this response about ignoring people

 

[soulcougher73]

What it shows is people who call themselves Christian don't know the bible as well as atheists/agnostics. I know the bible better than bshole, his misrepresentations of it are the problem.

OR...just for shits and giggles. It could be YOUR interpretation that is wrong. He was a former Christian so he is also well versed in the bible.

 

[JEDIYoda]

OR...just for shits and giggles. It could be YOUR interpretation that is wrong. He was a former Christian so he is also well versed in the bible.

Now that is funny!!!

 

[JEDIYoda]

What it shows is people who call themselves Christian don't know the bible as well as atheists/agnostics. I know the bible better than bshole, his misrepresentations of it are the problem.

No what it shows is that those n the poll did not know the Bible very well!! You cannot ,lump all Christians together!!

 

[buckshot24]

No what it shows is that those n the poll did not know the Bible very well!! You cannot ,lump all Christians together!!

Sure but how did they determine who was a Christian? By asking them. That doesn't make you a Christian.

 

[Moonbeam]

To be completely honest, I don't even know if there is an "us". I could easily just be a brain hooked into the matrix. How would one go about proving that the unverse and everything in it exists? We have to presuppose that it exists. That presupposition removes any chance of absolute truth. Surely you must concede this point. Only the very religious deny it.

Why is it "to be completely honest there can't be absolute truth" Rather than I wouldn't know completely honest if it bit me in the ass? You build your own prison with the assumptions you make. We don't know anything, period. What does that leave you with. You blabber about how everything is meaningless but you keep insisting you know what's meaningful and what isn't. You say everything is empty of meaning while clinging to a pile of shit.

Everything is empty of meaning, everything, get it? Think about it.

 

[soulcougher73]

No what it shows is that those n the poll did not know the Bible very well!! You cannot ,lump all Christians together!!

Well the ones here also don't know the Bible very well. So it's pretty generally accurate

 

[WelshBloke]

You are trying to make that identity.

My position is...

But I really don't expect you to back anything up now. I glanced at that other thread.

 

[buckshot24]

But I really don't expect you to back anything up now. I glanced at that other thread.

You're the one making the claim!

 

[shira]

To be completely honest, I don't even know if there is an "us". I could easily just be a brain hooked into the matrix. How would one go about proving that the unverse and everything in it exists? We have to presuppose that it exists. That presupposition removes any chance of absolute truth. Surely you must concede this point. Only the very religious deny it.

Why is it "to be completely honest there can't be absolute truth" Rather than I wouldn't know completely honest if it bit me in the ass? You build your own prison with the assumptions you make. We don't know anything, period. What does that leave you with. You blabber about how everything is meaningless but you keep insisting you know what's meaningful and what isn't. You say everything is empty of meaning while clinging to a pile of shit.

Everything is empty of meaning, everything, get it? Think about it.

Did I ever tell you that I know the sound of one hand clapping? But the Acme School of Buddha has begged me not to reveal the secret; they're worried about the loss of business.

 

[WelshBloke]

My position is that known/=not free and always has been.

You're the one making the claim!

Back up your position.

 

[buckshot24]

Back up your position.

You realize that my position is the default position? You want to make them equal and it is up to you to make your case.

 

[WelshBloke]

You realize that my position is the default position?

I disagree, I'm going to have to get you to prove that.

 

[JD50]

You realize that my position is the default position? You want to make them equal and it is up to you to make your case.

lol, you think the default position is that there's no difference between the past, present, and future?

 

[buckshot24]

I disagree, I'm going to have to get you to prove that.

Disagree all you want. You're trying to equate two different things, it is up to you to show how those two different things aren't really different.

 

[soulcougher73]

It's sad he's put the whole forum on "the list". He can't see the ownage. Must be a sad lonely forum for him.

 

[WelshBloke]

Disagree all you want. You're trying to equate two different things, it is up to you to show how those two different things aren't really different.

Strange how everyone else has to prove everything yet you, apparently, need to do nothing but spout warm air.

It's sad he's put the whole forum on "the list". He can't see the ownage. Must be a sad lonely forum for him.

At this point he's just acting as a learning lesson. He's probably doing more harm to his side of the argument by not addressing anything. Imagine that you're an undecided and you read this thread...

 

[JD50]

Strange how everyone else has to prove everything yet you, apparently, need to do nothing but spout warm air.

At this point he's just acting as a learning lesson. He's probably doing more harm to his side of the argument by not addressing anything. Imagine that you're an undecided and you read this thread...

:thumbsup:

 

[buckshot24]

Strange how everyone else has to prove everything yet you, apparently, need to do nothing but spout warm air.

So are you retracting the contention that known=not free now? If so, good because it was unsustainable.

At this point he's just acting as a learning lesson. He's probably doing more harm to his side of the argument by not addressing anything. Imagine that you're an undecided and you read this thread...

Asking you to show your assertions are true is doing my side harm? Absurd. Fact of the matter is you can't make the case and you know it.

 

[WelshBloke]

So are you retracting the contention that known=not free now? If so, good because it was unsustainable.

Given that you are refusing to back up any of your points or positions I can just ignore any requests like that from you. I've made my points and backed them up to my satisfaction. If you're not happy with them its up to you to show where and why I'm wrong.

Asking you to show your assertions are true is doing my side harm? Absurd. Fact of the matter is you can't make the case and you know it.

Nope. Being a cowardly weasel is what's going to turn people off your side. It's up to you if you want to continue being one.