If a pantheistic God were admitted to .... (proof, against, examples)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sure . I " lost " to a guy so bright he can't even get the name of an astronomical entity correct when trying to pretend he is knowledgeable on the subject , and admits he was full of crap in his rush to demonize me because he is frustrated .
LMAO.
And yes, spelling in this case matters . No one would believe in someone claiming to be very knowledgeable in astronomy who wrote about Satern and Jupitor, or who claimed to have all this mathematics knowledge about aljeber and triggernometery, and who claim to write advance math theriums. Proper spelling indicates knowledge of a subject in this case .
The fact that you can't process that I have repeatedly said I have no complaints or objections to people believing in pantheism is not my problem , but goes hand in hand with your spelling skills to suggest you are not well equipped intellectually for participating in such discussions as these .
And I answered every reasonable question you asked , so spare me the additional bullsheet . That claim is as much bull manure as your admitted overstated claim about all my contradictions. Once again, show me what I didn't answer . If I missed one while dealing with 3 posters simultaneously I will gladly give it .
You just can't seem to keep from ramming your foot in your mouth .
Last edited by wallflash; 05-30-2016 at 06:26 PM..
post 111 and 126. You can't have it both ways. You can't say I can think what I want and then tell me what I have to want. That's a contradiction. so that's your foot not mine. there was one more where you ripped weak minded believers, but I am not wasting my time.
It has to be something else bothering you. There is no way such reasonable answers allude you. We all said it doesn't matter to you, and that's fine. It may mean something to others, that's fine too. We said, Fundymental type pantheist people should not be forcing opinions on others. But you kept ranting about how we are wrong.
There are times when we can tell people that claim "we can't know" that they are null and void. Whether you agree or not isn't important. Claiming that this region of space is alive is more valid than claiming it is not alive. Your take on the topic are null and void due to lack of information. And this region of space is this region of space, no matter what you call it. The ort cloud example demonstrates your limitations quite clearly.
The fact that you cant get past a "O" in Oort is a red flag my man. That upset you far past a normal person. I can see why a person telling you anything you don't agree with getting you very emotional.
You can start proving your integrity by stopping all the childish personal attacks on everyone you disagree with - demonstrate that you can engage in civil discourse with people who hold to other beliefs, finding a way to present your perspective without denigrating them in the process.
You can start proving your integrity by stopping all the childish personal attacks on everyone you disagree with
Meanwhile you can start establishing you even have any integrity by no longer misrepresenting what people say to you, and openly and honestly acknowledging where you misrepresented me not just slightly, but ENTIRELY, and apologize for, and retract, that statement. In doing this you can demonstrate that you can engage in civil discourse with people who hold to other beliefs, finding away to present your perspective without straw manning them in the process. And then perhaps you can establish a real pedestal, rather than an imaginary one, to place yourself on while you presume to admonish others for their behavior. As I like to say.... clean up your own house before running a dust searching finger along the side boards in someone elses. Because right now you have NO basis for admonishing others about integrity. At. all. Despite what having a cheer leader ^ following you around might make you think.
This thread is about a pantheistic god. So once again if anyone wants to engage with integrity they might start doing so by acknowledging that quite a few people have expressed confusion as to what relevance or meaning such a god even has. Because all the definitions offered so far on this forum, and this thread, for it make it look like nothing more than a 1:1 mapping between terminology. And there is no apparent substantial difference between words like "Universe" and "god"..... or "everything" and "god"..... or "source" and "god"..... in the pantheistic world view. Yet their USAGE and reverence and worship of this use of the word "god" nevertheless suggests there IS some different in their minds between that word and the others. Yet despite their inability to adumbrate for us what that difference might even be, they presume to question the integrity of those who simply do not see what they (imagine) they see.
We said the relevance to such a claim can be different for different people. For some it makes no difference and for some it does. We also pointed out that people who go running around telling other people that "it must mean this to you" are wrong. We call these people fundamental type people.
We also said these statements are rational for more than just a discussion on a pantheist god. And he just keeps pointing out "pantheist can't tell agnostics", yeah, we said that.
We also pointed out that he seems to keep limiting the discussion to a pantheist telling an agnostic that the agnostic must accept the pantheist view. We pointed out above, the pantheist should not force their belief on others. We get that and agreed. We tried to go a little further but because he just keeps placing these limits on us we accused him of limiting the discussion to just pantheist, and nothing else, to pigeon toe any other discussion so that his view remains the only view. All in all, it is very clear at this point.
Something else is bothering him or he has some agenda that he is not showing us because everything we stated is so reasonable. There is no reason to be hammering us about our stance . Our stance is "for some it makes no difference in their life, for some it does make a difference." No person should be telling people what "meaning" pantheism should have for them IN THIS CASE. I use the meaning of a "rock garden", Dark, matter, and 1-O ort cloud as examples to support his and our claims.
All of which seem to **** him off. We are wondering why?
Last edited by Arach Angle; 05-31-2016 at 03:22 AM..
I have to call that a good post Arach. After the 'Nothingness' thread was halted by the mods, I wondered whether this wasn't overdue. I just don't get why discussions between atheists and theist agnostics (with whom any disagreement is purely academic) get so acrimonious. Worse than debates with the religious. I understand the religious mindset, I think but I can't make out "Agnostics".
Anyway, to topic, did anyone say what it wold mean if a Pantheist god were admitted to?
I have to call that a good post Arach. After the 'Nothingness' thread was halted by the mods, I wondered whether this wasn't overdue. I just don't get why discussions between atheists and theist agnostics (with whom any disagreement is purely academic) get so acrimonious. Worse than debates with the religious. I understand the religious mindset, I think but I can't make out "Agnostics".
Anyway, to topic, did anyone say what it wold mean if a were admitted to?
For some it doesn't change their world at all and for some it does. What does it mean to you that they found the Higgs? How did your life change?
I have said this already but I guess it bears repeating . Your opinion is of no concern to me, so I feel no need to prove anything to you . I get rough and tumble when others get that way. That this may not sit well with you does not matter to me .
You're certainly entitled to be flagrantly self-ratifying and rude at the same time. It's just important to make sure that you're upfront about it, so that everything you say can be more easily marginalized in that context.
I admit that rock gardens are nice. That doesn't change my life much past putting some stones around a bush. They tell me it's nice, so I did it. Hey, I can put some rocks in places to reduce erosion too. Yeah, I guess it looks ok too. On with my life I go.
I wonder of wall will understand, I admit he will, on with my life I go.
post 111 and 126. You can't have it both ways. You can't say I can think what I want and then tell me what I have to want. That's a contradiction. so that's your foot not mine. there was one more where you ripped weak minded believers, but I am not wasting my time.
It has to be something else bothering you. There is no way such reasonable answers allude you. We all said it doesn't matter to you, and that's fine. It may mean something to others, that's fine too. We said, Fundymental type pantheist people should not be forcing opinions on others. But you kept ranting about how we are wrong.
There are times when we can tell people that claim "we can't know" that they are null and void. Whether you agree or not isn't important. Claiming that this region of space is alive is more valid than claiming it is not alive. Your take on the topic are null and void due to lack of information. And this region of space is this region of space, no matter what you call it. The ort cloud example demonstrates your limitations quite clearly.
The fact that you cant get past a "O" in Oort is a red flag my man. That upset you far past a normal person. I can see why a person telling you anything you don't agree with getting you very emotional.
You were hammered with the O in Oort Cloud because of your condescending comments about not needing a sledgehammer when your pinkie would do . And this has been explained to you, so here we go again with you not seeming to get the point . If you want to act arrogantly that's fine, but when you make such an elementary mistake while simultaneously pretending intellectual superiority , I am going to throw it back at you .
Post 111 addresses the fact that some pantheists insist that everyone admit to their way of thinking , and points out that even admitting to it would be pointless for the agnostic .
Post 126 points out that some pantheists are trying to force their views on others, and says that while pantheists are free to believe as they wish others don't have to agree.
Where do you see a contradiction in this? Once again, you show you can't seem to comprehend what is being said, and accuse me of things I have not in actuality said .
By the way, pantheism can be both irrelevant in reality but having some meaning for some perceptually at the same time . I can illustrate if needed . But think about it .
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
