Searching for GOD...

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Fallacy Boy,

Actually it's the routine use of "antitheist" when you actually mean "rationalist" that's the only "piece of crap" here.

If you don't like the reasoning that undoes you, why not try to counter it rather than insult the people who explain it to you?

You may have, in one golden nanosecond have produced a picoscintilla of reasoning but you have in no ways undone anybody.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Somebody has to do the job - so far the theist contingent here are to logic what Winston Churchill was to Woodbines.

Car crash

[bluehillside Retd.]

Fallacy Boy,

You may have, in one golden nanosecond have produced a picoscintilla of reasoning but you have in no ways undone anybody.

That you don't understand or lie about being undone (over and over again in fact) does not mean that you haven't been undone.

On which subject, any thoughts on why when the logic defeats you you ignore the problem and instead just label those who make the arguments "antitheist" etc?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Fallacy Boy,

That you don't understand or lie about being undone (over and over again in fact) does not mean that you haven't been undone.

On which subject, any thoughts on why when the logic defeats you you ignore the problem and instead just label those who make the arguments "antitheist" etc?

One thing missing (again)......The actual undoing.

[Shaker]

Car crash

Leave you and Alan Burns out of this.

[Alan Burns]

How do you know that it's this god character which has made itself known?

Unless you can enter my mind, you can't know what makes me so certain.

I do sympathise with those who have not yet known God, for until you experience God in your life, you can never fully understand the stance of fully committed Christians.  So I would urge you to pray in whatever way you can, and read the New Testament with renewed understanding.  And it would help if you genuinely want to find God in your life, rather than search for reasons to reject Him.

[Shaker]

Unless you can enter my mind, you can't know what makes me so certain.

Well that's the end of that one, then.

So I would urge you to pray in whatever way you can

Why would people who don't believe in gods pray?

and read the New Testament with renewed understanding.

I've read it. What does "renewed understanding" mean? What in your view was wrong with my understanding before "renewed understanding" kicks in, in your view?

And it would help if you genuinely want to find God in your life, rather than search for reasons to reject Him.

Why would wanting to find a thing help to find that thing? Especially in terms of the sort of god you prate and prattle about.

I try to be on the ball as far as possible but sometimes even I lose my keys, my phone, I look for a specific book I want to find - mere wanting ever so ever so hard doesn't actually help me find them.

Psychologists have a term for that: it's called magical thinking.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

AB,

Possibly you missed my reply 19594 when I took the trouble to falsify your position line-by-line?

Two problems there:

First, there is no “door” of “it’s impossible”. I’ve explained this to you already – no-one says that either your conjecture “God” or my conjecture unicorns is impossible, so that’s not a door that needs opening.

Second though inasmuch as there is a closed door it’s the one that stops you from getting to “absolute certainty” about anything. How would you propose to eliminate even the possibility that you’re wrong?

Car crash

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Second though inasmuch as there is a closed door it’s the one that stops you from getting to “absolute certainty” about anything

.....And you're absolutely certain of that?......................................................................


,,,,Like shootin' fish in a barrel.

[Shaker]

Car crash

Is this your latest lazy non-reply in place of Stalinist Orwellian antitheism? Looks like it's fast becoming it.

[ippy]

Unless you can enter my mind, you can't know what makes me so certain.

I do sympathise with those who have not yet known God, for until you experience God in your life, you can never fully understand the stance of fully committed Christians.  So I would urge you to pray in whatever way you can, and read the New Testament with renewed understanding.  And it would help if you genuinely want to find God in your life, rather than search for reasons to reject Him.

Apart from where people like you pass the indoctrination that your religion requires you to pass onto the next lot of victims, usually very young children, other than that it's really a load silly old nonsense, not that worrysome and equally as likely to be factual as believing in pixies unicorns or some other existing myth perhaps make up your own mythical belief?

As a matter of interest Alan where were you living at the time you were  indoctrinated and I wondered if your place of indoctrination, wherever that was, was it close by?

ippy

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Is this your latest lazy non-reply in place of Stalinist Orwellian antitheism? Looks like it's fast becoming it.

Nice use of words.................Like negotiating a hopscotch grid in an articulated lorry.

[Shaker]

Nice use of words.................Like negotiating a hopscotch grid in an articulated lorry.

Ah, he's pissed again.

[torridon]

Unless you can enter my mind, you can't know what makes me so certain.

I do sympathise with those who have not yet known God, for until you experience God in your life, you can never fully understand the stance of fully committed Christians.  So I would urge you to pray in whatever way you can, and read the New Testament with renewed understanding.  And it would help if you genuinely want to find God in your life, rather than search for reasons to reject Him.

Been there, done that, bought the t shirt, doesn't work for me.  Whatever it is that is going on in your mind, it isn't something universal, rather it is something subjective, local to you.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Been there, done that, bought the t shirt, doesn't work for me.  Whatever it is that is going on in your mind, it isn't something universal, rather it is something subjective, local to you.

Torridon. Could you relate what it is that did not work for you and in what way it didn't work?
Discussing matters like this doesn't come easy to us of British stock but it's the kind of thing that comes more willingly in Christianity.

[floo]

Unless you can enter my mind, you can't know what makes me so certain.

I do sympathise with those who have not yet known God, for until you experience God in your life, you can never fully understand the stance of fully committed Christians.  So I would urge you to pray in whatever way you can, and read the New Testament with renewed understanding.  And it would help if you genuinely want to find God in your life, rather than search for reasons to reject Him.

But we can all experience things which seem very real at the time, but it doesn't mean they are.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

But we can all experience things which seem very real at the time, but it doesn't mean they are.

Ok so we reject experiences...or retain only those we are told are acceptable or brought up to accept?

Torridon and to an extent Hillside has let the cat out of the bag by promoting discounting the possibility of certainty.

That decidedly smacks of evasion and yet the two gentlemen somehow attach virtue to it and suggest it as a feature of genuine open mindedness!

[Shaker]

Ok so we reject experiences...or retain only those we are told are acceptable or brought up to accept?

Or a third option is not to be a silly sausage a la Burns and not claim absolute truth and true-for-you-too universalism on the basis of an entirely individual, subjective experience (which - while we're about it - he often refers to in an airy, handy-wavy way but has never, to the very best of my knowledge, actually related or described. The exiguousness of time and space, doubtless).

That decidedly smacks of evasion

To you it does, I dare say.

and yet the two gentlemen somehow attach virtue to it and suggest it as a feature of genuine open mindedness!

Which it is.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Or a third option is not to be a silly sausage a la Burns and not claim absolute truth and true-for-you-too universalism on the basis of an entirely individual, subjective experience (which - while we're about it - he often refers to in an airy, handy-wavy way but has never, to the very best of my knowledge, actually related or described. The exiguousness of time and space, doubtless).
To you it does, I dare say.Which it is.

It isn't though Shaker.
No one can say with conviction that you can be absolutely certain you can't be absolutely certain.
The prescription of Hillside and Torridon is therefore one of Dogmatic agnosticism. There is no way round that and that implies shutting down of faculties......of course we never see that since Dogmatic agnostics are caught acting from what they have nailed their colours to...... just like the moral relatives are seen taking firm moral stances in a state of convinced righteousness.

My own view is this... Dogmatic agnostics shut off doors and entrances and exits just in case there is ''something out there''. The danger here is of people in personal lockdown.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Fallacy Boy,

Me:

That you don't understand or lie about being undone (over and over again in fact) does not mean that you haven't been undone.

You:

One thing missing (again)......The actual undoing.

QED

Car crash

Dull incomprehension noted. In the unlikely event you ever want to try at least an argument to support your eructations, by all means try again though.

.....And you're absolutely certain of that?......................................................................

No – that’s just yet another of your straw men fallacies. I’ve made clear that I’m not daft enough to claim to be certain of anything.

You on the other hand…

,,,,Like shootin' fish in a barrel myself in both feet and then the head.

Corrected if for you.

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

Unless you can enter my mind, you can't know what makes me so certain.

But we can “enter your mind” at least to the extent that your mind sometimes tries to tell us why you believe what you believe. And when you do that, it’s trivially easy to work out that you have only very bad arguments.

You also though claim to have some better or more detailed arguments but for some reason you seem to want to keep them a secret, which is odd given your keenness to proselytise. 

I do sympathise with those who have not yet known God, for until you experience God in your life, you can never fully understand the stance of fully committed Christians.

And speaking of very bad arguments, that’s called the fallacy of reification. Just asserting your personal beliefs tells others nothing about whether or not they’re true.

So I would urge you to pray in whatever way you can, and read the New Testament with renewed understanding.  And it would help if you genuinely want to find God in your life, rather than search for reasons to reject Him.

That’s not the problem. Rather the problem is finding reasons to think you to be right. So far at least you’ve provided none, but one day perhaps you’ll grace us with a reason that isn’t broken.

Good luck with it!

[Shaker]

Given his keenness to proselytise (this being his admitted reason for being here) you'd really think that AB would find the elusive time and space to share with us his non-broken, non-fallacious arguments for taking his beliefs seriously. But no.

Weird.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Fallacy Boy,

It isn't though Shaker.
No one can say with conviction that you can be absolutely certain you can't be absolutely certain.

Another of your straw men fallacies. No-one claims to be “absolutely certain” about anything, except that is for the religious.

The prescription of Hillside and Torridon is therefore one of Dogmatic agnosticism. There is no way round that…

Of course there is. Just stop lying about what we actually say.

…and that implies shutting down of faculties......of course we never see that since Dogmatic agnostics are caught acting from what they have nailed their colours to...... just like the moral relatives are seen taking firm moral stances in a state of convinced righteousness.

Perhaps some sort of lying aversion therapy would help you – maybe you could have mousetraps impale sensitive parts of your body whenever you tell a lie. You’d quickly end up looking like a colander, but it’s worth a try.

My own view is this... Dogmatic agnostics shut off doors and entrances and exits just in case there is ''something out there''. The danger here is of people in personal lockdown.

Your “own view” is that you presume to critique only straw men entirely of your own making, and moreover that you have not one jot of a scintilla of an argument for your religious beliefs that isn’t logically hopeless.

Apart from that though…

[floo]

Ok so we reject experiences...or retain only those we are told are acceptable or brought up to accept?

Torridon and to an extent Hillside has let the cat out of the bag by promoting discounting the possibility of certainty.

That decidedly smacks of evasion and yet the two gentlemen somehow attach virtue to it and suggest it as a feature of genuine open mindedness!

We should always question our experiences. Certainty about god being a genuine entity can be discounted. Whilst there is a remote possibility one might exist, until there is irrefutable evidence that is so, it is reasonable to disbelieve it is a fact.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Fallacy Boy,

Ok so we reject experiences...

BEEEP! Fallacy alert: another straw man.

No-one "rejects experience”. What is rejected is the narratives some attempt to explain their experiences, especially when the logic attempted to support them is broken.

…or retain only those we are told are acceptable or brought up to accept?

BEEEP! Another lie.

You can “retain” anything you like. What you can’t do though is expect others to treat your beliefs seriously until and unless you finally manage some reasoning for them that isn’t hopeless.   

Torridon and to an extent Hillside has let the cat out of the bag by promoting discounting the possibility of certainty.

BEEEP! Nurse, he’s lying again!

No-one did that. What was actually said was that there’s no known means to demonstrate absolute certainty. It’s also hard to imagine how there ever could be, but if you know of one by all means share. 

That decidedly smacks of evasion and yet the two gentlemen somehow attach virtue to it and suggest it as a feature of genuine open mindedness!

BEEEP! Another straw man.

The king of evasion makes up something no-one has said, then accuses them of evasion for (not) saying it.

Perhaps when you're back from your genuflections at Our Lady of the Perpetually Mendacious you'd like to turn your "thoughts" to the arguments some of us have actually made? 

You never know, it might be good for the little man at your controls Alan calls "soul"!