@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
Get control of yourself...and we can discuss this in a reasonable, courteous way, Krumple. I suspect, however, that you would prefer to argue against hardcore theists...so you can assert what you suppose to be logical superiority.
In any case, I live my life in a way totally consistent with: I do not know the true nature of the REALITY of existence.
There may be gods (or at least one god) involved...there may be no gods.
I live my life in complete consistency with that.
Where do you see the inconsistency?
I've explained it, here and in that other thread. Your lack of consistency is not seeing these other examples. Simply replace the word "god" with anything absurd thing and you are faced with the possibility of it. It doesn't even have to be a noun. It can be an event. You would still be faced with the same consequences. Such as, I don't know that there is a large asteroid about to hit the earth. You are not in this constant state of "I don't know." it to be true. Your brain quickly rationalizes it to be irrational to think that there is. It uses past experience to place you into a comfortable state of knowing.
And why are you avoiding discussing your assertion that you KNOW there are no gods?
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
And why are you avoiding discussing your assertion that you KNOW there are no gods?
I understand now Frank, you are incapable of understanding anything I say because you are in a constant state of not knowing. I get it now. You must be fun at parties.
I now take back what I said, you are in fact consistent. You know nothing about everything.
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
Krumple wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
And why are you avoiding discussing your assertion that you KNOW there are no gods?
I understand now Frank, you are incapable of understanding anything I say because you are in a constant state of not knowing. I get it now. You must be fun at parties.
I now take back what I said, you are in fact consistent. You know nothing with everything.
I ask again: Why are you avoiding discussing your assertion that you KNOW there are no gods?
Frank you are incapable of knowing what I am saying. You are incapable of knowing that we are even having this discussion. You are incapable of knowing that you are even awake or dreaming or anything.
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
Krumple wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
Krumple wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
And why are you avoiding discussing your assertion that you KNOW there are no gods?
I understand now Frank, you are incapable of understanding anything I say because you are in a constant state of not knowing. I get it now. You must be fun at parties.
I now take back what I said, you are in fact consistent. You know nothing with everything.
I ask again: Why are you avoiding discussing your assertion that you KNOW there are no gods?
Frank you are incapable of knowing what I am saying. You are incapable of knowing that we are even having this discussion. You are incapable of knowing that you are even awake or dreaming or anything.
I KNOW plenty of things, Krumple.
You realize you have painted yourself into a corner...and now are looking to deflect rather than discuss.
Here is one thing I know:
I KNOW...you do not know there are no gods in REALITY.
Tell yourself that if it makes you feel better. I completely understand now. I get why people have to constantly remind you of stuff, because you are in this proverbial state of not knowing.
@Krumple,
Keep evading, Krumple. It is your only move.
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
Keep evading, Krumple. It is your only move.
I know there is no god like you know there is not a bogyman living in your closet.
Do I keep having to repeat this since you do not know that I have already said it?
By deductive reasoning alone, it is impossible to prove/disprove the existence of God.
One reason is the insufficiency of our axioms and definitions. Consider this example of my current situation:
I am now enjoying a delightful beverage in the shade of an accomodating Douglas Fir.
How do I know, how may I prove it's a Douglas Fir and not, for example, a Sitka Spruce, Loblolly Pine, or Western Hemlock? Well, for one thing, I graded lumber in a sawmill for a few years and know species well. Not enough? Well, the bark and needle configuration is consistent with photographic images with which I may compare.
Hold on . . . Picking needles . . . Breaking in hand . . . Sniff! . . . Ahh!...
Yeah, that's it. OK, I'm satisfied. But you?
For all you know I could be baking in this blasted heat, hallucinating in near death desparation.
And a tree is something we can reach out and grasp.
Obviously, belief in God requires yet greater discernment
@Krumple,
Quote:I know there is no god like you know there is not a bogyman living in your closet.
I can open a door to the closet and prove there is no bogeyman . How do you prove there is no God ?
@neologist,
neologist wrote:And a tree is something we can reach out and grasp.
Obviously, belief in God requires yet greater discernment
What does this discernment involve if God isn't reach out and graspable?
@neologist,
neologist wrote:
InfraBlue wrote:What does this discernment involve if God isn't reach out and graspable?
Why,
greater discernemt, of course
What does this greater discernment involve if God isn't reach out and graspable?
Thanks for the replies lads and ladies.
On evidence.
It is to the one making the claim to show how he came to his decision and belief.
If lack of evidence is in itself evidence, which I think it should be, then I should be able to honestly say that God does not exist because of lack of evidence.
Theists do not like this type of language yet cannot produce any evidence for their positive claim that God exists.
Do you all think that a theist making a claim of God's existence has a moral responsibility to prove he or she is not lying?
Regards
DL
@Greatest I am,
I think of the Bible as half and half...BUT most important knowledge acquired by reading the Bible, I believe to be true. What most people have confusion about is life itself. Is this life what God intended? (as referenced in the Bible?)
The sporadic wisdom in the Bible is uncontested. Sure, be kind to others, especially the underpriviliged. You can get that from any number of other religions, or, for that matter, secular self-help books.
The only question that means anything is whether or not this invisible, allegedly all-powerful and infinititely compassionate creator who allegedly killed almost every living thing he created actually exists or not. Until someone presents credible evidence, it seems much more commonsense to consider that y'all are just extremely gullible to take Bronze Age myths as more real than evidence-based science.
From a commonsense perspective, I see no reason to restructure my whole life, cosmology, behavior and worldview based on very, very old, self-contradictory stories produced by people who didn't even know that the sun is a star.
You guys are going to need more than feel-good rhetoric to sell this story. Cough up some credible evidence, please, then we'll talk.
