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.
The fact that TRANS labels other atheists as “anti-atheists“ just because they prefer he would employ a more sophisticated, reasoned and effective approach, is proof that his motivation is NOT from a desire to accomplish a goal.
If efficacy is not driving his decades-long efforts, what is?
its not even really about sophistication. It really is about deciding what reality is based on ones godfaith.
One doesn't have to be sophisticated to stand up to those guys. Its actually more akin to talking to a teenager that can't see through the fog.
trans and his groupies are deciding everything based on "stop religion". Which then deploys anti-god as the weapon of choice. He is using a statement of belief about god as a weapon. Just like any religion-ist think type does.
trans stuff on religion is spot on. His stuff about we needing to "obscure" some science, change how we word it, and/or tell people "Thats fine but just out out of our way" show that this is about an agenda to promote his statement of belief about god.
The strawman argument is actually a sham. the fact that the game was changed twice, they have to shun anything that sasses out their fait, and have to personally attack people that call them out for using the same tactics as fundy theist is all the proof that is needed. They are as much about godfaith as you iwas.
Is this was about "sophistication" ... the could easily tell a theist, yes, something more is by far more valid, deities aint even close and this is why ..."
but they can't.
Last edited by Arach Angle; 10-10-2020 at 07:52 AM..
I find it interesting to see this argument about what most humans have perceived over thousands of years...
While away from this forum for awhile, I considered (reconsidered) the value of time spent here, and much I've caught up on in some of these threads upon my return today has the scales tilting toward spending far less time than I used to, but is there value in addressing comments like this one? Any whatsoever?
I mean..., while away I also finished another book about our history going back thousands of years. Over and over I'm amazed at all the ridiculous things most people have believed over these thousands of years of our history. Utterly ridiculous and still what the great majority of us not only believed, but killed each other over! Ignorance beyond words. The reading/learning has me to the point of skepticism about pretty much anything we humans have all believed due to a vacuum of understanding AKA ignorance.
At a minimum, this is just NOT a good argument to support the existence of a "God entity." What our history has taught us or should teach us is that we just can't help ourselves. We still don't know how to handle what we don't understand, because most of us are too impressed with our mental capacities to accept what we simply can't know. Yet.
Now there's a fair post giving you a better reply than you deserve, Goldenrule. How about trying to write a response that will impress the browsers rather than teaming up with atheist -bashers like Arach and posting heckler -slogans that just make you and theism look bad?
You really don't get it. The symmetry of our ignorance prevents the assignment of ANY evidence about our Reality to EITHER view. That makes the evidence useless because it can apply to either view about our Reality because "We Do Not Know WHAT our Reality IS or IS NOT." It has nothing to do with word games just your lack of comprehension about what that means for the assignment of evidence. You assign every bit of evidence to No God. I assign every bit of evidence to God. Why do YOU get to decide what the evidence signifies given that "We Do Not Know WHAT our Reality IS or IS NOT."
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRANSPONDER
Now there's a fair post giving you a better reply than you deserve, Goldenrule. How about trying to write a response that will impress the browsers rather than teaming up with atheist -bashers like Arach and posting heckler -slogans that just make you and theism look bad?
Take your own advice, Arq. Despite your hubris, atheists do NOT own the definitive BELIEF about our Reality.
You really don't get it. The symmetry of our ignorance prevents the assignment of ANY evidence about our Reality to EITHER view. That makes the evidence useless because it can apply to either view about our Reality because "We Do Not Know WHAT our Reality IS or IS NOT." It has nothing to do with word games just your lack of comprehension about what that means for the assignment of evidence. You assign every bit of evidence to No God. I assign every bit of evidence to God. Why do YOU get to decide what the evidence signifies given that "We Do Not Know WHAT our Reality IS or IS NOT."
No doubt one of us surely doesn't get it, but if I point out it's you, I know you'll just point out it's me, so we need not play that game anymore I don't think...
If the "symmetry of our ignorance prevents the assignment of ANY evidence about our Reality to Either view," your premise, then no doubt you drive us off the road into soft sand and an absolute intellectual dead end. I prefer the road of facts, reason and logic that you insist we cannot evaluate in order to separate fact from fiction, reality from non-reality. I simply don't accept that premise.
Seems best to just leave you spinning your wheels in that soft sand while I move onto a bit more solid ground. All the best to you with all that!
Now there's a fair post giving you a better reply than you deserve, Goldenrule. How about trying to write a response that will impress the browsers rather than teaming up with atheist -bashers like Arach and posting heckler -slogans that just make you and theism look bad?
I was just stating the facts of the matter.
Most have perceived a God Entity...and that is objectively true.
I was not assessing the details of those beliefs...just that it is that way.
I noted that many believe things I don't...and I believe things that others do not.
I was calling for an acceptance of others...even if they believe something theologically that you don't.
No doubt one of us surely doesn't get it, but if I point out it's you, I know you'll just point out it's me, so we need not play that game anymore I don't think...
If the "symmetry of our ignorance prevents the assignment of ANY evidence about our Reality to Either view," your premise, then no doubt you drive us off the road into soft sand and an absolute intellectual dead end. I prefer the road of facts, reason and logic that you insist we cannot evaluate in order to separate fact from fiction, reality from non-reality. I simply don't accept that premise.
Seems best to just leave you spinning your wheels in that soft sand while I move onto a bit more solid ground. All the best to you with all that!
We are ALL using the hard facts about our Reality, LearnMe, You just presumptively assert that the facts ERASE our ignorance about WHAT our Reality IS in favor of YOUR preferred BELIEF about it. That you and so many others have difficulty acknowledging this simple FACT speaks volumes about the bias and lack of discipline in your intellectual processing. At least, I accept that my view is my preferred BELIEF about our Reality. You seem unable to see the validity of that regarding your preferred BELIEF about it. NEITHER of us can assert our view as FACT and we do NOT need to do so to accept all the facts we DO discover about our Reality. Those facts stand on their own and we BOTH accept them as information about HOW our Reality operates even though we do NOT know WHAT our Reality IS - your irrational fear of sand by parsing known FACTS from your preferred BELIEF about Reality notwithstanding.
I was just stating the facts of the matter.
Most have perceived a God Entity...and that is objectively true.
I was not assessing the details of those beliefs...just that it is that way.
I noted that many believe things I don't...and I believe things that others do not.
I was calling for an acceptance of others...even if they believe something theologically that you don't.
Oh, you people are so crafty.
Here's your post.
Originally Posted by GldnRule View Post
I've always been cool with a Atheistic view. Have whatever ideology you want. All spiritual viewpoints have merit to those who hold them.
But do not be telling others their view is not meritorious...because of some biased headtrip you have against it.
Most that have existed over thousands of years perceive a God Entity...and that would be MOST.
To tell them that their perception is bogus...just because you declare it to be...is what's actually bogus.
Accusations of bias, denial of validated evidence, ignoring the way logical reasoning works, just to pin the 'god' label on the rocks and sand. The pretending that not accepting any cockamamie faith -claim as equally valid is bias is just your habitual craftiness.
Like I say, try to sell it to LearnMe who is willing to give you an opportunity to make your case.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 10-10-2020 at 12:17 PM..
I was just stating the facts of the matter.
Most have perceived a God Entity...and that is objectively true.
I was not assessing the details of those beliefs...just that it is that way.
I noted that many believe things I don't...and I believe things that others do not.
I was calling for an acceptance of others...even if they believe something theologically that you don't.
I like stating the facts of the matter, the best we can, and of course we don't all know, understand or believe all the facts in the same way, but for me it is not a matter of accepting others. It's about what FACTS we should accept and/or know better what are not facts. I accept everyone's comments in this forum, for example, but I don't accept all of them as truthful or equally worthy in all variety of ways.
More specifically, I gladly accept the friendship, even love, I have with some people who believe something theologically that I don't, but that's not the issue here. Not for me anyway. I simply don't accept the reason or logic that many of my friends and family have with respect to believing something theologically that I don't. All as discussed to death in this forum in typical futile fashion for a long time now.
A bit of more futility I'll reserve for perhaps tomorrow I think...
Now there's a fair post giving you a better reply than you deserve, Goldenrule. How about trying to write a response that will impress the browsers rather than teaming up with atheist -bashers like Arach and posting heckler -slogans that just make you and theism look bad?
yeah, if they weren't so true you wouldn't have to run away and hide ol' chum'. You could face them down every time they came up.
But you know that if you actually clarify what we mean and how we determine reliability, you are afraid that it hurts your, err, anti-god faith crusade to save us poor heathens that just don't understand.
I like stating the facts of the matter, the best we can, and of course we don't all know, understand or believe all the facts in the same way, but for me it is not a matter of accepting others. It's about what FACTS we should accept and/or know better what are not facts. I accept everyone's comments in this forum, for example, but I don't accept all of them as truthful or equally worthy in all variety of ways.
More specifically, I gladly accept the friendship, even love, I have with some people who believe something theologically that I don't, but that's not the issue here. Not for me anyway. I simply don't accept the reason or logic that many of my friends and family have with respect to believing something theologically that I don't. All as discussed to death in this forum in typical futile fashion for a long time now.
A bit of more futility I'll reserve for perhaps tomorrow I think...
this is all fine and dandy learnme. But this is not an agenda free site. It is an anti-religion cite, more specifically anti-Christian site (out side of that forum sub forum).
The pantheist god has merit. so much merit that it has to be burnt to the ground because it gets in the way of an agenda more than its not true. if the hard push wasn't attached to an anti-godfaith for all agenda we would just shrug and say "Ok, I call it the 'verse and you call it god."
But that is not what is going on here.
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.
