The joy of religion - part xxxxxxxxx

[buckshot24]

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.

Do what you like but it is upon the person making the assertion to prove or support it, not the one who doesn't believe it to disprove it. This is basic stuff man.

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.

Two things that aren't the same thing doesn't need to be proven.

 

[WelshBloke]

Do what you like but it is upon the person making the assertion to prove or support it, not the one who doesn't believe it to disprove it. This is basic stuff man.

So your saying that you haven't stated anything of value in this thread that needs to be supported? I certainly agree with the first part there.

You believe that god exists? I don't believe he does. It's up to you to prove it or he doesn't.
Is that how it works?

Two things that aren't the same thing doesn't need to be proven.

That doesn't even make any sense.

 

[buckshot24]

So your saying that you haven't stated anything of value in this thread that needs to be supported? I certainly agree with the first part there.

It's called burden of proof. The defense attorney doesn't need to solve the crime.

You believe that god exists? I don't believe he does. It's up to you to prove it or he doesn't.
Is that how it works?

I don't think a belief is something that needs to be proven. You have beliefs it wouldn't be fair of me to have you try and prove them to me. If I asserted "God exists". Then I have some burden of proof. You wouldn't need to prove I was wrong. You are saying "known=not free", that is your burden to prove not mine to debunk.

That doesn't even make any sense.

Known/=not free, I don't need to prove the negative true.

 

[WelshBloke]

It's called burden of proof. The defense attorney doesn't need to solve the crime.

A) This isn't a court of law.
B) There isn't a crime.
C) You have no idea how to debate. (tip, it involves you putting forward an argument as well)

I don't think a belief is something that needs to be proven. You have beliefs it wouldn't be fair of me to have you try and prove them to me. If I asserted "God exists". Then I have some burden of proof. You wouldn't need to prove I was wrong. You are saying "known=not free", that is your burden to prove not mine to debunk.

Strange position to take. You believe that he exists but you can't say that he has done anything because then you'd have to prove it.

Known/=not free, I don't need to prove the negative true.

If you are stating a position you have to support it. You're not having to prove a negative there.

I'm saying that if a choice is known before its made its not a free choice because there's only one possible outcome.

You're saying that if a choice is known before its made its still a free choice because....

 

[buckshot24]

A) This isn't a court of law.
B) There isn't a crime.
C) You have no idea how to debate. (tip, it involves you putting forward an argument as well)

Ironic that you say I don't know how to debate but you don't understand the burden of proof.

If you are stating a position you have to support it. You're not having to prove a negative there.

Then why don't you?

I'm saying that if a choice is known before its made its not a free choice because there's only one possible outcome.

I understand what the assertion is. But why isn't a free choice? Why does the number of possible outcomes matter? And what is forcing the choice since you believe it isn't free? You've said it wasn't God, so what is it?

You're saying that if a choice is known before its made its still a free choice because....

Not quite what I'm saying. It can be not free but it being known isn't sufficient. Something has to force a specific "choice" or it cannot be anything other than a free choice no matter who knows about it. You're mixing adjectives here.

How can something not be free? If something compels or forces it, that's it.

So if it is "known" then the only thing we can say about it is it isn't unknown.

 

[WelshBloke]

Not quite what I'm saying. It can be not free but it being known isn't sufficient. Something has to force a specific "choice" or it cannot be anything other than a free choice no matter who knows about it. You're mixing adjectives here.

How can something not be free? If something compels or forces it, that's it.

So if it is "known" then the only thing we can say about it is it isn't unknown.

If there's only one outcome it's not even a choice.

Explain how it's a choice if there's one outcome. What's it a choice between?

 

[buckshot24]

If there's only one outcome it's not even a choice.

Explain how it's a choice if there's one outcome. What's it a choice between?

What is forcing the choice? If nothing, then it is free.

 

[WelshBloke]

If nothing, then it is free.

What's it a choice between then?

 

[buckshot24]

What's it a choice between then?

You didn't answer my question. If nothing is forcing, coercing, or influencing the choice then it can be nothing other than free. You're mixing adjectives again.

 

[WelshBloke]

You didn't answer my question.

You haven't answered any.

Go look up the definition of choice.

If nothing is forcing, coercing, or influencing the choice then it can be nothing other than free. You're mixing adjectives again.

You need to go look at the definition of choice.

 

[FelixDeCat]

lol atheists

 

[buckshot24]

lol atheists

 

[buckshot24]

You haven't answered any.

Go look up the definition of choice.



You need to go look at the definition of choice.

I did and I didn't see anything about "unknown" in the definitions.

 

[WelshBloke]

I did and I didn't see anything about "unknown" in the definitions.

You didn't post any. Here you go.

choice/CHois/
noun

an act of selecting or making a decision when faced with two or more possibilities.

So it's not a choice with just the one possibility.

 

[bshole]

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.

I contend that if you were alive 2000 years ago, you would have been writing gnostic gospels.


From the Gospel of Thomas:

(2) Jesus said, "Let him who seeks continue seeking until he finds. When he finds, he will become troubled. When he becomes troubled, he will be astonished, and he will rule over the All."

(3) Jesus said, "If those who lead you say to you, 'See, the kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, 'It is in the sea,' then the fish will precede you. Rather, the kingdom is inside of you, and it is outside of you. When you come to know yourselves, then you will become known, and you will realize that it is you who are the sons of the living father. But if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty and it is you who are that poverty."

(11) Jesus said, "This heaven will pass away, and the one above it will pass away. The dead are not alive, and the living will not die. In the days when you consumed what is dead, you made it what is alive. When you come to dwell in the light, what will you do? On the day when you were one you became two. But when you become two, what will you do?"

etc....

 

[buckshot24]

You didn't post any. Here you go.



So it's not a choice with just the one possibility.

You're going to pick one over the other no matter what. Plus you still have not shown what is forcing the decision if it isn't free. If there is nothing then it has to be free by definition.

There is nothing about known or unknown there either.

 

[JEDIYoda]

I have an idea!!
Youy atheists need tio start a church and study up on free will verses God` will...oopps...I am sorry!! You already have atheist churches........

 

[WelshBloke]

You're going to pick one over the other no matter what.

Which other? There is only one possible outcome and its known in advance.

That's not a choice by any definition of the word choice.

Plus you still have not shown what is forcing the decision if it isn't free. If there is nothing then it has to be free by definition.

There is nothing about known or unknown there either.

We can get to that later, it's all irrelevant if you can't show that there's a choice in the first place.

 

[Victorian Gray]

I have an idea!!
Youy atheists need tio start a church and study up on free will verses God` will...oopps...I am sorry!! You already have atheist churches........

 

[buckshot24]

Which other? There is only one possible outcome and its known in advance.

That's not a choice by any definition of the word choice.

That is the way decisions work. You come to them and you make a choice. You can't turn left and right at the same time. What is compelling you to make your choice? If nothing, then it is a free choice.

We can get to that later, it's all irrelevant if you can't show that there's a choice in the first place.

There is a choice and you will make it.

 

[bshole]

I have an idea!!
Youy atheists need tio start a church and study up on free will verses God` will...oopps...I am sorry!! You already have atheist churches........

You are an Atheist to every other religion than yours. If they are right and you are wrong, you will burn along with all the atheists. How can you possibly know if you were born into the right religion when demonstrable evidence of it's truth is an impossibility?

 

[WelshBloke]

That is the way decisions work. You come to them and you make a choice.

Indeed, a choice. That'll be something without a fixed outcome. Not what you're describing.

You can't turn left and right at the same time.

But you can turn left OR right. That's what makes it a choice.

What is compelling you to make your choice?

What does it matter?

If nothing, then it is a free choice.
There is a choice and you will make it.

Nope. There has to be more than one possible outcome for it to be a choice. Go read your definitions again.

 

[buckshot24]

Indeed, a choice. That'll be something without a fixed outcome. Not what you're describing.

Ok, to the list.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Ok, to the list.

And soon he'll be talking to nobody but himself.

 

[WelshBloke]

And soon he'll be talking to nobody but himself.

It's hilarious isn't it?