Should religion have a public forum?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

In which Trollboy not only attempts a diversionary tactic in the hope that no-one notices his avoidance of the question about his absence of a method to distinguish his religious claims from nonsense but does so by resurrecting his already failed attempt at a false dilemma fallacy.

We want to know what the morality bit is in the moral relativity schtick...........at the moment morals equals marmite.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Not strictly true since sociolgy and social science are not exact and politics is also an arena for competing moral positions hence the validity of religion in politics.

In which Trollboy attempts to conflate the provisional and tentative findings of sociology and social science with the supposedly factual claims of the religious in the hope that no-one notice the category error.

[Shaker]

I will get round to leaving one day

Chalk up another one for Shaker's Law.

[bluehillside Retd.]

I'm accusing anyone of shite moderation who let's Hillside and his claque go round referring to me as Trollboy.

In which Trollboy's relentless trolling is identified as such and he then complains at being correctly labelled for his behaviour, apparently oblivious to the standing offer to respond to him when finally he stops trolling and instead attempts for once to engage honestly with what's actually said rather than just lie about it.

[bluehillside Retd.]

.....And then just when the antitheists thought they had an edenic paradise in which everything in the garden was rosy..............

In which Trollboy repeats his false conflation of atheism with anti-theism despite have a thread opened specifically to correct him on it.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

In which Trollboy repeats his false conflation of atheism with anti-theism despite have a thread opened specifically to correct him on it.

How can I. I never even mentioned atheists..........another Turd Buff from the Smurf.

[bluehillside Retd.]

We want to know what the morality bit is in the moral relativity schtick...........at the moment morals equals marmite.

In which Trollboy appears to forget that he's been corrected on this matter on two different threads now but just vanished when it's happened only to reappear here to revivify his failed attempt at a false dilemma fallacy in the hope that no-one notices that his binary "objective morality vs real morality" has an eight-lane motorway of practical morality running through it, just as there are eight-lane motorways of practical aesthetics, practical legal judgments etc.

[bluehillside Retd.]

How can I. I never even mentioned atheists..........another Turd Buff from the Smurf.

In which Trollboy conveniently forgets that he consistently and relentlessly mis-labels those who make arguments that are merely atheistic as "anti-theists" even though he's been corrected on the difference between the two.

Is anyone else expecting a mushroom cloud on the horizon soon when he finally implodes into cataclysmic collapse under the overwhelming weight of his wrecked logic and pathological mendacity?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

In which Trollboy conveniently forgets that he consistently and relentlessly mis-labels those who make arguments that are merely atheistic as "anti-theists" even though he's been corrected on the difference between the two.

Is anyone else expecting a mushroom cloud on the horizon soon when he finally implodes into cataclysmic collapse under the overwhelming weight of his wrecked logic and pathological mendacity?

Angry Smurf

[bluehillside Retd.]

Angry Smurf

In which having given up on reason, honesty and any interest at all he may once have had in debating anything Trollboy switches on his random word generator app and goes for lie down to try to figure out how to use some of the mountain of takeaway cartons to fashion a nice tinfoil hat while compiling a new list of -isms he can redefine for his personal use.

[Shaker]

Best one yet bluey 

[ippy]

yeh..but they opted for a decisive ''no public forum.''

Revise your voting system.

ippy

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Revise your voting system.

ippy

I'm sorry that'd be results massaging.

[Owlswing]

In which Trollboy conveniently forgets that he consistently and relentlessly mis-labels those who make arguments that are merely atheistic as "anti-theists" even though he's been corrected on the difference between the two.

Is anyone else expecting a mushroom cloud on the horizon soon when he finally implodes into cataclysmic collapse under the overwhelming weight of his wrecked logic and pathological mendacity?

The Deputy Super-Troll-in-Chief [in the absence fromthis forum of the Super-Troll-in-Chief] keeps going on about the "two [atheists - anti-theists] who have voted for "No public Forum"" when he considers that the vast majority of posters on this forum fall into these categories. Hardly what you would call an overwhelming vote against religious fora is it?

[Owlswing]

And you know that Vlad doesn't match those parameters?   

. . . and you, of course, being the fount of all knowledge about absolutely everything and everyone, do. Quelle surprise! NOT!

[Sassy]

Sassy,

For the avoidance of doubt, are you – Sassy – actually accusing someone else of having "no arguments" and of being here just to "moan and complain"? 

Someone else!!!!!!!!!

Wow!

AND???
I am a child of God, saved by the power of God through the body and blood of Jesus Christ.
When it comes to the things of God and the bible I am naturally in a better position than you and Floo to decide what the bible is teaching.

As I have said many time previous to this thread being written, both yourself and Floo, do not know the bible well enough to discuss it.

Ignorance is as Ignorance does and there is no surprise the blind lead the blind or support them. After all how can you see beyond the comments Floo makes when you have never supported your arguments or been able to show a good command or understanding of who Jesus Christ is, or what the bible it teaching.

Say whatever you may, I still know more about the bible and Jesus Christ than you will ever know in a life time of unbelief.

Floo and yourself are just not educated enough in the words of the bible to even realise why the above is true.

Say what remarks you will. The truth won't change. The fact is you have no true knowledge of Christ or Gods word.
So should remain quiet till you do.

[Sassy]

If, we are honest there is no way that religion cannot be in the public eye and way of life.
One has to remember that to remove every belief a form of mind control would need to exist.

The Kingdom of God is about change from within affecting the external.

Can we really change that religion is a bigger fact of life than anything else in the world.
God being the central person and in Christianity Christ leading the way.

[floo]

Sass thanks for the first funny I have come across today that really made me giggle!

"I am a child of God, saved by the power of God through the body and blood of Jesus Christ.
When it comes to the things of God and the bible I am naturally in a better position than you and Floo to decide what the bible is teaching."

I suspect if god and Jesus were really around in the ether somewhere they wouldn't be thrilled to have you in their gang!

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sassy,

I am a child of God, saved by the power of God through the body and blood of Jesus Christ.

A belief I don't doubt you hold sincerely, even though you have provided no reason for anyone else to think you're right about that.

When it comes to the things of God and the bible I am naturally in a better position than you and Floo to decide what the bible is teaching.

Yes you are - I know as little about the contents of the Bible as you know about the contents of the Talmud, the Tao-te-ching, the Upanishads etc. You cannot though just assume "the things of God" and the contents of the Bible to be the same thing.

As I have said many time previous to this thread being written, both yourself and Floo, do not know the bible well enough to discuss it.

I agree, which is why I don't.

Ignorance is as Ignorance does and there is no surprise the blind lead the blind or support them. After all how can you see beyond the comments Floo makes when you have never supported your arguments or been able to show a good command or understanding of who Jesus Christ is, or what the bible it teaching.

But before we get to the Bible (or to an other "holy" text for the matter) you have to address the primary ignorance at play here: that is, your ignorance of the basic logical fallacy you're unwittingly attempting called the reification fallacy. Just saying "the Bible is the word of God" doesn't actually make it the word of God. That's why I've asked you several times how you would break out of your circular reasoning of: "God is real because the Bible says so/the Bible is accurate because God made it that way" but you never answer. That's the "argument" that's actually relevant here, and ironically the person who never addresses it is you: just quoting ever-longer chunks from a book isn't an argument of any kind, it's just chunks from a book. What you're doing here in other words is equivalent to me claiming that Harry Potter is real and quoting chunks from "Philosopher's Stone" as my argument for it.

Say whatever you may, I still know more about the bible and Jesus Christ than you will ever know in a life time of unbelief.

So how would you respond if you challenged my Potterism and I replied: "Say whatever you may, I still know more about the Philosopher's Stone and Harry Potter than you will ever know in a life time of unbelief"?

I agree that you know more about the Bible, though I have no idea whether you know anything at all about Jesus Christ. I know though that you either will not or cannot explain why we should agree with your faith beliefs and so we must treat you as probably wrong until and unless you can do that without collapsing straight back into fallacious thinking.

Sorry, but there it is.

[Hope]

. . . and you, of course, being the fount of all knowledge about absolutely everything and everyone, do. Quelle surprise! NOT!

That's an interesting way to avoid the question, Owl.

[Owlswing]

That's an interesting way to avoid the question, Owl.

I learnt how to avoid answering questions from the Forum experts at doing so - you, Sassy and Vlad!

It is called "reaping what you sow".

[Hope]

I learnt how to avoid answering questions from the Forum experts at doing so - you, Sassy and Vlad.

I am learning myself - from you and others. 

[Owlswing]

I am learning myself - from you and others.

Oh, no, Ducky, you were here long before I arrived and I started taking my lessons from you on day one!

[bluehillside Retd.]

Hope,

I am learning myself - from you and others.

Well, before you learn too much, perhaps you could trouble us with your reply to my question about what method the authors of these alleged articles that "went beyond the scientific" proposed to enable the editors of the journals that rejected them to sift their claims from complete nonsense.

Thanks.

[Owlswing]

Hope,

Well, before you learn too much, perhaps you could trouble us with your reply to my question about what method the authors of these alleged articles that "went beyond the scientific" proposed to enable the editors of the journals that rejected them to sift their claims from complete nonsense.

Thanks.