Godlike Productions - Discussion Forum
Users Online Now: 1,610 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 284,073
Pageviews Today: 451,735Threads Today: 145Posts Today: 2,296
05:45 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people

 
MaybeTrollingU  (OP)

User ID: 75358302
Brazil
06/27/2018 11:09 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
...


I'm not trolling in this one. And "there is obviously a higher being, is a claim not supported by evidence.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


On what basis do you make this claim, op? I ask because it is taken as an article of faith by atheists and agnostics as if it were a given. But when you try to establish what would constitute evidence, there is no clear answer. It is difficult to judge what is true or false when there isn't even an agreement on the measuring stick in use.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 11375876


Atheism is exactly the opposite, its the lack of belief. And no, lack of belief is not the same as believing in something. Evidence is something the furnishes proof. Both these concepts, proof and evidence, are subject to logic, if it can be falsified by logic, is not evidence or proof. That's my take on the subject thou and definitive definitions may vary a little bit. But there is a consensus on what evidence and proof are NOT. Being subjected to scientific method must be applicable.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


I mentioned this slippery slope of yours re evidence and positive claims last night, but you did not respond and then signed off for the night, so I will give you another crack at it.

Thread: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people (Page 9)

This question of evidence comes up all the time because regardless of what evidence is put forth, it is rejected out of hand as not credible because of the strong, yet groundless and unquestioned BELIEF that there is no evidence. So it becomes a vicious circle of nah, nope, not that, not that either, isn't, hardly, etc. When asked why none of this is evidence, it just rolls back to the insistent yet unsupported belief that there is no evidence.

And yet, as I stated in the linked post, along with this insistence of no evidence comes the strong claim that only materialism is true and that when we die that's the end, period. But neither claim has any evidence to support it.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 11375876


When referring to evidence, the most common approach is the scientific method. When one claims "there is an afterlife" it is a positive claim, thus, must be supported by evidence. Evidence must be possible to replicate and be clear to anyone examining it. A personal testimony or a book is not enough evidence. An extraordinary claim requires an extraordinary evidence. For example, I can say: I have a pet dog. Its a very plausible claim and not hard to be verified. But when I say: I have a pet dragon, its an extraordinary claim that must be supported by extraordinary evidence. More claims are not evidence, I can say: well, my pet dragon can only be seen by me, can't be detected by any human method of verification and don't interact with the world we live in, but I've made a drawing of it and my uncle saw the drawing and believed me. This is not evidence enough to support a pet dragon.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 11375876
United States
06/27/2018 11:36 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
...


On what basis do you make this claim, op? I ask because it is taken as an article of faith by atheists and agnostics as if it were a given. But when you try to establish what would constitute evidence, there is no clear answer. It is difficult to judge what is true or false when there isn't even an agreement on the measuring stick in use.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 11375876


Atheism is exactly the opposite, its the lack of belief. And no, lack of belief is not the same as believing in something. Evidence is something the furnishes proof. Both these concepts, proof and evidence, are subject to logic, if it can be falsified by logic, is not evidence or proof. That's my take on the subject thou and definitive definitions may vary a little bit. But there is a consensus on what evidence and proof are NOT. Being subjected to scientific method must be applicable.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


I mentioned this slippery slope of yours re evidence and positive claims last night, but you did not respond and then signed off for the night, so I will give you another crack at it.

Thread: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people (Page 9)

This question of evidence comes up all the time because regardless of what evidence is put forth, it is rejected out of hand as not credible because of the strong, yet groundless and unquestioned BELIEF that there is no evidence. So it becomes a vicious circle of nah, nope, not that, not that either, isn't, hardly, etc. When asked why none of this is evidence, it just rolls back to the insistent yet unsupported belief that there is no evidence.

And yet, as I stated in the linked post, along with this insistence of no evidence comes the strong claim that only materialism is true and that when we die that's the end, period. But neither claim has any evidence to support it.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 11375876


When referring to evidence, the most common approach is the scientific method. When one claims "there is an afterlife" it is a positive claim, thus, must be supported by evidence. Evidence must be possible to replicate and be clear to anyone examining it. A personal testimony or a book is not enough evidence. An extraordinary claim requires an extraordinary evidence. For example, I can say: I have a pet dog. Its a very plausible claim and not hard to be verified. But when I say: I have a pet dragon, its an extraordinary claim that must be supported by extraordinary evidence. More claims are not evidence, I can say: well, my pet dragon can only be seen by me, can't be detected by any human method of verification and don't interact with the world we live in, but I've made a drawing of it and my uncle saw the drawing and believed me. This is not evidence enough to support a pet dragon.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


You are simply replying by reflex, op. You probably should have read the link I gave because you ignored everything in it and have weakened your case considerably as well.

First off you don't really believe the part about scientific method being the litmus test because you, like me and everyone else, are quite willing to accept claims that cannot be verified by it, as long as they fit your general experience.

Take your pet dragon. Everything you say is true regarding the weakness of the claim. It would certainly not hold up to any scrutiny. However, I can make a similar claim that is technically just as weak as the pet dragon claim and cannot be verified by the method you are saying must be applied:

Last night, I had a dream about a red pony.

I cannot prove that claim, I cannot even replicate it, and you cannot falsify it, and yet, unless someone thinks I am lying it, there is no reason to doubt my claim.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 11375876
United States
06/27/2018 12:06 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
...


On what basis do you make this claim, op? I ask because it is taken as an article of faith by atheists and agnostics as if it were a given. But when you try to establish what would constitute evidence, there is no clear answer. It is difficult to judge what is true or false when there isn't even an agreement on the measuring stick in use.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 11375876


Atheism is exactly the opposite, its the lack of belief. And no, lack of belief is not the same as believing in something. Evidence is something the furnishes proof. Both these concepts, proof and evidence, are subject to logic, if it can be falsified by logic, is not evidence or proof. That's my take on the subject thou and definitive definitions may vary a little bit. But there is a consensus on what evidence and proof are NOT. Being subjected to scientific method must be applicable.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


I mentioned this slippery slope of yours re evidence and positive claims last night, but you did not respond and then signed off for the night, so I will give you another crack at it.

Thread: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people (Page 9)

This question of evidence comes up all the time because regardless of what evidence is put forth, it is rejected out of hand as not credible because of the strong, yet groundless and unquestioned BELIEF that there is no evidence. So it becomes a vicious circle of nah, nope, not that, not that either, isn't, hardly, etc. When asked why none of this is evidence, it just rolls back to the insistent yet unsupported belief that there is no evidence.

And yet, as I stated in the linked post, along with this insistence of no evidence comes the strong claim that only materialism is true and that when we die that's the end, period. But neither claim has any evidence to support it.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 11375876


When referring to evidence, the most common approach is the scientific method. When one claims "there is an afterlife" it is a positive claim, thus, must be supported by evidence. Evidence must be possible to replicate and be clear to anyone examining it. A personal testimony or a book is not enough evidence. An extraordinary claim requires an extraordinary evidence.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


All of this is true. And yet, the common atheist claim, that this is the only life we get, is an equally positive claim, yet unlike the claims of an afterlife, there isn't even a shred of anecdotal evidence. It is not a claim that is accepted based on weak evidence; it is a claim that is accepted based on no evidence at all. It is 100% faith-based.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 76663684
Australia
06/27/2018 12:18 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
It's a rational question to ask yourself.

5* for asking people to think op. You may not like all the answers you get though. You asked.
 Quoting: MultiStrada


Thanks! I'm aware that religious people don't welcome rationality too well, the threats and agressiveness were expected.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU



Some reactions are quite disturbing, violent.
The fear is very strong in some.
Some are absolutely terrified. Unable to even consider the possibility, of even just trying to think for a second, of anything different whatsoever.

I find it quite sad, what religion has done to so many otherwise beautiful people.

Great thread Op 5*

.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 11375876
United States
06/27/2018 12:36 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
It's a rational question to ask yourself.

5* for asking people to think op. You may not like all the answers you get though. You asked.
 Quoting: MultiStrada


Thanks! I'm aware that religious people don't welcome rationality too well, the threats and agressiveness were expected.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU



Some reactions are quite disturbing, violent.
The fear is very strong in some.
Some are absolutely terrified. Unable to even consider the possibility, of even just trying to think for a second, of anything different whatsoever.

I find it quite sad, what religion has done to so many otherwise beautiful people.

Great thread Op 5*

.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 76663684


It may be a mistake to attribute fear of rationality to religion, or if you want to do so, then it would have to be deduced that atheism is just as much a religion as the rest of them. This is because for all the talk of being guided by rational thought or logic and evidence, atheists are as prone to reject rational thought as any religious person if that rational thought goes against the grain of their accepted beliefs.
TheLordsServant

User ID: 76715324
United States
06/27/2018 12:41 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
The worst thing you can do is cite one source and then do the "BOOM HEADSHOT I WIN FTW" You mentioned millions of miracles. post a 700 club video and then claim victory. No.

IF you are trying to prove him wrong you will need more then a first hand witness. You need multiple people who have had the same experience describing the same thing so someone can take all that information into a pattern. It's what CSI and NCIS does on tv.

But your problem is there is so few faith 'things' that the millions you said happen every year cant be tracked. You really need to get with your local church so they start tracking these miracles.

If you think about it, the churches have ignored and not categorized these millions of miracles WHICH IS theiR jOB but have just been building houses for the cleregy and buying planes.

You need to talk to your Bishop

on edit: Boom headshot. :)

edit2: FTW!!!!!!
 Quoting: Ascanius


It should be pointed out that you are munging two posts and that the points that TLS is responding to in the post that I wrote have nothing to do with the other post about the miracles. Mine is a different post responding to different points.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 11375876


ok miracle mary , when you pick a few miracle mushrooms on your lawn and start seeing the million miracles, feel free to reply..

I donno why an avid miracle hunter and spotter was so quick to not spot the miracles in the area? How many children could have been helped had that million miracle quiver been full of Gods love.

Can we meet up tomorrow at Cincy Childrens hospital? There are hundred of sweet innocent kids there that need millions of angels. When should I expect you there?
 Quoting: Ascanius


Young kids...IF they haven't totally rejected God & Jesus, are taken to Heaven when they pass on.

Kids...and folks in general...who receive miracles, are "chosen vessels" (like Moses & Paul were), and will have future tasks to do for God.

Not all are chosen.
I am a humble Servant of the one True Living God.
MarPep

User ID: 76711952
United States
06/27/2018 12:55 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
Those who reject all religious dogma/doctrine naturally must choose a "philosophy of Life and behavior" to guide their actions, and those who fail to do so can not be considered as fully mature.

If we choose to desire/prefer Life, Truth, Love, Peace, Justice, and Liberty, many of us wind up with the same POVs and attitudes and reasons for action provided by Jesus in the New Testament. He, like Cicero 80 years earlier, also warned us about those who were known deceivers, murderers, and money/power worshipers. Arguments have been made that He was the most spiritually advanced human of all time . For those reasons, his views on the afterlife and God need to also be studied.

The church dogma from the Council of Nicea onward is suspect.

I want to add that Christians can be believers in evolution and in reincarnation.

Last Edited by MarPep on 06/27/2018 02:07 PM
_______________
They let me off with a warning and a couple of bullet holes.
TheLordsServant

User ID: 76715324
United States
06/27/2018 12:59 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
Its a thought exercise, an abstraction exercise. If you can, imagine that all you know about your specific religion is a lie. Like all the religions along history that arise, faded and die, think that your religion is also a lie. What would you do?

- If you can't do it and go with the path "It can't be" or "I just can't cope with such an idea", don't bother posting.
- Don't quote the bible, its pointless for the exercise, if you can't do it, you fall under the category above, of people incapable of abstract thinking
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU

You do realize that there are 2.2 billion Christians. The cumulative length of time that the Judeo-Christian religion is possibly as old as when humans first began agricuture so 10,000 years old.

During that time, lots of religions died out, but Christianity did not.

So you want us to suppose it will become extinct, yet it is not, and not use Scriptures. So our hands are tied behind our back, then you are free to say whatever you want.

What a troll tread, and actually it exposes your intentions and total inabilty to defend atheism.

There is contest or debate. It's just trolling. How weak.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 72341210


and u failed. this wasnt a faith test, it was a test if you have critical thinking skills. and you lost.
 Quoting: Ascanius


The "critical thinking skills" argument is nothing more than a atheistic Darwinian attempt / attack on Believers.

It shows that you folks have no "proof" of the non-existance of God, so you mock anyone who claims such belief.

Sure it odd that each year, more and MORE scientists are coming aroung to intelligent design. The Darwinistic leaders of the scientific community keep trying to kick them to the curb, but they are in a losing battle.

This guy was an atheist who used critical thinking skills, and ended up giving his life to Christ and believeing in God.

[link to www.youtube.com (secure)]



I am a humble Servant of the one True Living God.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45661100
United States
06/27/2018 01:02 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
Its a thought exercise, an abstraction exercise. If you can, imagine that all you know about your specific religion is a lie. Like all the religions along history that arise, faded and die, think that your religion is also a lie. What would you do?

- If you can't do it and go with the path "It can't be" or "I just can't cope with such an idea", don't bother posting.
- Don't quote the bible, its pointless for the exercise, if you can't do it, you fall under the category above, of people incapable of abstract thinking
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


I believe in the LAW OF ONE. I found it by a lifetime of searching for truth. If it turned out to be a lie... I would simply continue the search
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45661100
United States
06/27/2018 01:06 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
Its a thought exercise, an abstraction exercise. If you can, imagine that all you know about your specific religion is a lie. Like all the religions along history that arise, faded and die, think that your religion is also a lie. What would you do?

- If you can't do it and go with the path "It can't be" or "I just can't cope with such an idea", don't bother posting.
- Don't quote the bible, its pointless for the exercise, if you can't do it, you fall under the category above, of people incapable of abstract thinking
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU

You do realize that there are 2.2 billion Christians. The cumulative length of time that the Judeo-Christian religion is possibly as old as when humans first began agricuture so 10,000 years old.

During that time, lots of religions died out, but Christianity did not.

So you want us to suppose it will become extinct, yet it is not, and not use Scriptures. So our hands are tied behind our back, then you are free to say whatever you want.

What a troll tread, and actually it exposes your intentions and total inabilty to defend atheism.

There is contest or debate. It's just trolling. How weak.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 72341210


and u failed. this wasnt a faith test, it was a test if you have critical thinking skills. and you lost.
 Quoting: Ascanius


The "critical thinking skills" argument is nothing more than a atheistic Darwinian attempt / attack on Believers.

It shows that you folks have no "proof" of the non-existance of God, so you mock anyone who claims such belief.

Sure it odd that each year, more and MORE scientists are coming aroung to intelligent design. The Darwinistic leaders of the scientific community keep trying to kick them to the curb, but they are in a losing battle.

This guy was an atheist who used critical thinking skills, and ended up giving his life to Christ and believeing in God.

[link to www.youtube.com (secure)]



 Quoting: TheLordsServant

There's also no "proof' of the non existence of bull horned mermaids with whale dicks for arms. But I doubt they exist.
MaybeTrollingU  (OP)

User ID: 75358302
Brazil
06/27/2018 01:11 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
...


Atheism is exactly the opposite, its the lack of belief. And no, lack of belief is not the same as believing in something. Evidence is something the furnishes proof. Both these concepts, proof and evidence, are subject to logic, if it can be falsified by logic, is not evidence or proof. That's my take on the subject thou and definitive definitions may vary a little bit. But there is a consensus on what evidence and proof are NOT. Being subjected to scientific method must be applicable.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


I mentioned this slippery slope of yours re evidence and positive claims last night, but you did not respond and then signed off for the night, so I will give you another crack at it.

Thread: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people (Page 9)

This question of evidence comes up all the time because regardless of what evidence is put forth, it is rejected out of hand as not credible because of the strong, yet groundless and unquestioned BELIEF that there is no evidence. So it becomes a vicious circle of nah, nope, not that, not that either, isn't, hardly, etc. When asked why none of this is evidence, it just rolls back to the insistent yet unsupported belief that there is no evidence.

And yet, as I stated in the linked post, along with this insistence of no evidence comes the strong claim that only materialism is true and that when we die that's the end, period. But neither claim has any evidence to support it.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 11375876


When referring to evidence, the most common approach is the scientific method. When one claims "there is an afterlife" it is a positive claim, thus, must be supported by evidence. Evidence must be possible to replicate and be clear to anyone examining it. A personal testimony or a book is not enough evidence. An extraordinary claim requires an extraordinary evidence. For example, I can say: I have a pet dog. Its a very plausible claim and not hard to be verified. But when I say: I have a pet dragon, its an extraordinary claim that must be supported by extraordinary evidence. More claims are not evidence, I can say: well, my pet dragon can only be seen by me, can't be detected by any human method of verification and don't interact with the world we live in, but I've made a drawing of it and my uncle saw the drawing and believed me. This is not evidence enough to support a pet dragon.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


You are simply replying by reflex, op. You probably should have read the link I gave because you ignored everything in it and have weakened your case considerably as well.

First off you don't really believe the part about scientific method being the litmus test because you, like me and everyone else, are quite willing to accept claims that cannot be verified by it, as long as they fit your general experience.

Take your pet dragon. Everything you say is true regarding the weakness of the claim. It would certainly not hold up to any scrutiny. However, I can make a similar claim that is technically just as weak as the pet dragon claim and cannot be verified by the method you are saying must be applied:

Last night, I had a dream about a red pony.

I cannot prove that claim, I cannot even replicate it, and you cannot falsify it, and yet, unless someone thinks I am lying it, there is no reason to doubt my claim.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 11375876


The non existence of an afterlife is the conclusion not the premise.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 11375876
United States
06/27/2018 01:53 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
...


I mentioned this slippery slope of yours re evidence and positive claims last night, but you did not respond and then signed off for the night, so I will give you another crack at it.

Thread: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people (Page 9)

This question of evidence comes up all the time because regardless of what evidence is put forth, it is rejected out of hand as not credible because of the strong, yet groundless and unquestioned BELIEF that there is no evidence. So it becomes a vicious circle of nah, nope, not that, not that either, isn't, hardly, etc. When asked why none of this is evidence, it just rolls back to the insistent yet unsupported belief that there is no evidence.

And yet, as I stated in the linked post, along with this insistence of no evidence comes the strong claim that only materialism is true and that when we die that's the end, period. But neither claim has any evidence to support it.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 11375876


When referring to evidence, the most common approach is the scientific method. When one claims "there is an afterlife" it is a positive claim, thus, must be supported by evidence. Evidence must be possible to replicate and be clear to anyone examining it. A personal testimony or a book is not enough evidence. An extraordinary claim requires an extraordinary evidence. For example, I can say: I have a pet dog. Its a very plausible claim and not hard to be verified. But when I say: I have a pet dragon, its an extraordinary claim that must be supported by extraordinary evidence. More claims are not evidence, I can say: well, my pet dragon can only be seen by me, can't be detected by any human method of verification and don't interact with the world we live in, but I've made a drawing of it and my uncle saw the drawing and believed me. This is not evidence enough to support a pet dragon.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


You are simply replying by reflex, op. You probably should have read the link I gave because you ignored everything in it and have weakened your case considerably as well.

First off you don't really believe the part about scientific method being the litmus test because you, like me and everyone else, are quite willing to accept claims that cannot be verified by it, as long as they fit your general experience.

Take your pet dragon. Everything you say is true regarding the weakness of the claim. It would certainly not hold up to any scrutiny. However, I can make a similar claim that is technically just as weak as the pet dragon claim and cannot be verified by the method you are saying must be applied:

Last night, I had a dream about a red pony.

I cannot prove that claim, I cannot even replicate it, and you cannot falsify it, and yet, unless someone thinks I am lying it, there is no reason to doubt my claim.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 11375876


The non existence of an afterlife is the conclusion not the premise.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


Yolo (You only live once) is a strong claim. It is not a conclusion and it is not based on any evidence. It is merely a belief based on a faulty logic chain. It cannot be supported by logic or evidence, yet you hold onto it because it fits your preconceived notions or faith based belief system.

That is all well and good and more power to you if it works for you. But to pretend that your world-view was arrived at based on reason and logic and evidence is disingenuous. It is therefore just as much a faith-based religion as any other.

So I pose to you your own question, imagine that all you know about your specific religion is a lie. Like all the religions along history that arise, faded and die, think that your religion is also a lie. What would you do?
MaybeTrollingU  (OP)

User ID: 75358302
Brazil
06/27/2018 02:03 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
...


When referring to evidence, the most common approach is the scientific method. When one claims "there is an afterlife" it is a positive claim, thus, must be supported by evidence. Evidence must be possible to replicate and be clear to anyone examining it. A personal testimony or a book is not enough evidence. An extraordinary claim requires an extraordinary evidence. For example, I can say: I have a pet dog. Its a very plausible claim and not hard to be verified. But when I say: I have a pet dragon, its an extraordinary claim that must be supported by extraordinary evidence. More claims are not evidence, I can say: well, my pet dragon can only be seen by me, can't be detected by any human method of verification and don't interact with the world we live in, but I've made a drawing of it and my uncle saw the drawing and believed me. This is not evidence enough to support a pet dragon.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


You are simply replying by reflex, op. You probably should have read the link I gave because you ignored everything in it and have weakened your case considerably as well.

First off you don't really believe the part about scientific method being the litmus test because you, like me and everyone else, are quite willing to accept claims that cannot be verified by it, as long as they fit your general experience.

Take your pet dragon. Everything you say is true regarding the weakness of the claim. It would certainly not hold up to any scrutiny. However, I can make a similar claim that is technically just as weak as the pet dragon claim and cannot be verified by the method you are saying must be applied:

Last night, I had a dream about a red pony.

I cannot prove that claim, I cannot even replicate it, and you cannot falsify it, and yet, unless someone thinks I am lying it, there is no reason to doubt my claim.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 11375876


The non existence of an afterlife is the conclusion not the premise.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


Yolo (You only live once) is a strong claim. It is not a conclusion and it is not based on any evidence. It is merely a belief based on a faulty logic chain. It cannot be supported by logic or evidence, yet you hold onto it because it fits your preconceived notions or faith based belief system.

That is all well and good and more power to you if it works for you. But to pretend that your world-view was arrived at based on reason and logic and evidence is disingenuous. It is therefore just as much a faith-based religion as any other.

So I pose to you your own question, imagine that all you know about your specific religion is a lie. Like all the religions along history that arise, faded and die, think that your religion is also a lie. What would you do?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 11375876


Its actually a simple logic:
There is no evidence of an afterlife, thus the conclusion is that an afterlife doesn't exist. If evidence comes up showing otherwise, I'll gladly change my point of view, but until there, the simple conclusion is that there is none. Therefore is not based on belief, but lack of evidence, like the "pet dragon" analogy I made a few posts back.

And answering your question, which is my own and I already answered before, I'll do it again in other words: You are under the impression that atheism is a religion, a set of believes when it couldn't be further from the reality. Atheism is the lack of a believe in a supernatural or anything that is not supported by evidence. So, repeating myself, if evidence is found to support an afterlife, I'll gladly change my point of view, until then, the only conclusion is that it doesn't exist.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 76685084
United States
06/27/2018 02:16 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
You know, it's kinda funny to hear someone base their whole life on the limited knowledge of "science" when one considers how much is unknown to science. It becomes a bit silly to put "faith" in it.

For example, some scientists acknowledge a 4th dimension but cannot explain it in any scientific terms because it is so "other." To limit oneself to earthly and known science, which is actually sorely lacking in knowledge, is short sighted, IMHO.

How much does a person think is known about the universe? A thousandth of a percent? Less? Is the knowledge of science as to what is in this universe even immeasurable in its insignificance? I believe that it is.

Only the ignorant and/or the arrogant trust in something so completely, that is so lacking. Yet, they do not see how short sighted they are. The intelligent scientists will admit as much, as did Isaac Newton. You know that guy who was smarter than all of us here combined?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 11375876
United States
06/27/2018 02:25 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
...


You are simply replying by reflex, op. You probably should have read the link I gave because you ignored everything in it and have weakened your case considerably as well.

First off you don't really believe the part about scientific method being the litmus test because you, like me and everyone else, are quite willing to accept claims that cannot be verified by it, as long as they fit your general experience.

Take your pet dragon. Everything you say is true regarding the weakness of the claim. It would certainly not hold up to any scrutiny. However, I can make a similar claim that is technically just as weak as the pet dragon claim and cannot be verified by the method you are saying must be applied:

Last night, I had a dream about a red pony.

I cannot prove that claim, I cannot even replicate it, and you cannot falsify it, and yet, unless someone thinks I am lying it, there is no reason to doubt my claim.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 11375876


The non existence of an afterlife is the conclusion not the premise.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


Yolo (You only live once) is a strong claim. It is not a conclusion and it is not based on any evidence. It is merely a belief based on a faulty logic chain. It cannot be supported by logic or evidence, yet you hold onto it because it fits your preconceived notions or faith based belief system.

That is all well and good and more power to you if it works for you. But to pretend that your world-view was arrived at based on reason and logic and evidence is disingenuous. It is therefore just as much a faith-based religion as any other.

So I pose to you your own question, imagine that all you know about your specific religion is a lie. Like all the religions along history that arise, faded and die, think that your religion is also a lie. What would you do?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 11375876


Its actually a simple logic:
There is no evidence of an afterlife, thus the conclusion is that an afterlife doesn't exist. If evidence comes up showing otherwise, I'll gladly change my point of view, but until there, the simple conclusion is that there is none. Therefore is not based on belief, but lack of evidence, like the "pet dragon" analogy I made a few posts back.

And answering your question, which is my own and I already answered before, I'll do it again in other words: You are under the impression that atheism is a religion, a set of believes when it couldn't be further from the reality. Atheism is the lack of a believe in a supernatural or anything that is not supported by evidence. So, repeating myself, if evidence is found to support an afterlife, I'll gladly change my point of view, until then, the only conclusion is that it doesn't exist.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


No, it is not simple logic. If it were, you would be demonstrating that logic instead of equivocating and deflecting as you are doing here.

Your pet dragon analogy fell apart a few posts back. You failed to respond to that point, but its conclusion still stands unless you can demonstrate the difference in kind between your pet dragon and my dream of a red pony based on the standards of evidence you set forth.

Forget the after-life. It is not the issue here. The strong claim is yolo, or life ends at death. What is the evidence you have to support this strong claim?

I am fully aware of what atheism is and isn't. Your argument is disingenuous. Strong atheism is indeed a claim that God does not exist, not merely a claim to not believe. This issue has been dealt with to death in the atheist community and things have evolved to the point where professing such a weak claim as yours will get you drummed out of many an atheist board.
MaybeTrollingU  (OP)

User ID: 75358302
Brazil
06/27/2018 02:30 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
...


The non existence of an afterlife is the conclusion not the premise.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


Yolo (You only live once) is a strong claim. It is not a conclusion and it is not based on any evidence. It is merely a belief based on a faulty logic chain. It cannot be supported by logic or evidence, yet you hold onto it because it fits your preconceived notions or faith based belief system.

That is all well and good and more power to you if it works for you. But to pretend that your world-view was arrived at based on reason and logic and evidence is disingenuous. It is therefore just as much a faith-based religion as any other.

So I pose to you your own question, imagine that all you know about your specific religion is a lie. Like all the religions along history that arise, faded and die, think that your religion is also a lie. What would you do?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 11375876


Its actually a simple logic:
There is no evidence of an afterlife, thus the conclusion is that an afterlife doesn't exist. If evidence comes up showing otherwise, I'll gladly change my point of view, but until there, the simple conclusion is that there is none. Therefore is not based on belief, but lack of evidence, like the "pet dragon" analogy I made a few posts back.

And answering your question, which is my own and I already answered before, I'll do it again in other words: You are under the impression that atheism is a religion, a set of believes when it couldn't be further from the reality. Atheism is the lack of a believe in a supernatural or anything that is not supported by evidence. So, repeating myself, if evidence is found to support an afterlife, I'll gladly change my point of view, until then, the only conclusion is that it doesn't exist.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


No, it is not simple logic. If it were, you would be demonstrating that logic instead of equivocating and deflecting as you are doing here.

Your pet dragon analogy fell apart a few posts back. You failed to respond to that point, but its conclusion still stands unless you can demonstrate the difference in kind between your pet dragon and my dream of a red pony based on the standards of evidence you set forth.

Forget the after-life. It is not the issue here. The strong claim is yolo, or life ends at death. What is the evidence you have to support this strong claim?

I am fully aware of what atheism is and isn't. Your argument is disingenuous. Strong atheism is indeed a claim that God does not exist, not merely a claim to not believe. This issue has been dealt with to death in the atheist community and things have evolved to the point where professing such a weak claim as yours will get you drummed out of many an atheist board.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 11375876


The evidence to support that there is no life after death is very simple. Its not observable, measurable or even probable.

Look at these two statements:
- I don't think that god exists
- I think that god doesn't exist

Can you spot the difference between them?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 76685084
United States
06/27/2018 02:38 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
Think about how ridiculous this statement is:

"The knowledge that I have about this universe and all the life forms therein is so insignificant, that it cannot even be measured. But, I put all my faith in that knowledge."

That is basically the argument being put forth.

chuckle
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 11375876
United States
06/27/2018 02:40 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
...


Yolo (You only live once) is a strong claim. It is not a conclusion and it is not based on any evidence. It is merely a belief based on a faulty logic chain. It cannot be supported by logic or evidence, yet you hold onto it because it fits your preconceived notions or faith based belief system.

That is all well and good and more power to you if it works for you. But to pretend that your world-view was arrived at based on reason and logic and evidence is disingenuous. It is therefore just as much a faith-based religion as any other.

So I pose to you your own question, imagine that all you know about your specific religion is a lie. Like all the religions along history that arise, faded and die, think that your religion is also a lie. What would you do?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 11375876


Its actually a simple logic:
There is no evidence of an afterlife, thus the conclusion is that an afterlife doesn't exist. If evidence comes up showing otherwise, I'll gladly change my point of view, but until there, the simple conclusion is that there is none. Therefore is not based on belief, but lack of evidence, like the "pet dragon" analogy I made a few posts back.

And answering your question, which is my own and I already answered before, I'll do it again in other words: You are under the impression that atheism is a religion, a set of believes when it couldn't be further from the reality. Atheism is the lack of a believe in a supernatural or anything that is not supported by evidence. So, repeating myself, if evidence is found to support an afterlife, I'll gladly change my point of view, until then, the only conclusion is that it doesn't exist.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


No, it is not simple logic. If it were, you would be demonstrating that logic instead of equivocating and deflecting as you are doing here.

Your pet dragon analogy fell apart a few posts back. You failed to respond to that point, but its conclusion still stands unless you can demonstrate the difference in kind between your pet dragon and my dream of a red pony based on the standards of evidence you set forth.

Forget the after-life. It is not the issue here. The strong claim is yolo, or life ends at death. What is the evidence you have to support this strong claim?

I am fully aware of what atheism is and isn't. Your argument is disingenuous. Strong atheism is indeed a claim that God does not exist, not merely a claim to not believe. This issue has been dealt with to death in the atheist community and things have evolved to the point where professing such a weak claim as yours will get you drummed out of many an atheist board.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 11375876


The evidence to support that there is no life after death is very simple. Its not observable, measurable or even probable.

Look at these two statements:
- I don't think that god exists
- I think that god doesn't exist

Can you spot the difference between them?
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


My dream of a red pony is not observable, measurable, or even probable, and you cannot falsify my claim. Yet you do not question that claim. Why?
MaybeTrollingU  (OP)

User ID: 75358302
Brazil
06/27/2018 02:42 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
Think about how ridiculous this statement is:

"The knowledge that I have about this universe and all the life forms therein is so insignificant, that it cannot even be measured. But, I put all my faith in that knowledge."

That is basically the argument being put forth.

chuckle
 Quoting: Laughing Falcon


There is no faith involved. And your analogy is very sneaky. Of course science doesn't know everything, of course its impossible to measure or even have an idea of how much we don't know. But what we do know is what we have to rely on. IMHO, its not wise to doubt we know for sure in detriment of the possibility of something we don't know to make it invalid. Knowledge evolves, our knowledge of reality evolves with it.
MaybeTrollingU  (OP)

User ID: 75358302
Brazil
06/27/2018 02:46 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
...


Its actually a simple logic:
There is no evidence of an afterlife, thus the conclusion is that an afterlife doesn't exist. If evidence comes up showing otherwise, I'll gladly change my point of view, but until there, the simple conclusion is that there is none. Therefore is not based on belief, but lack of evidence, like the "pet dragon" analogy I made a few posts back.

And answering your question, which is my own and I already answered before, I'll do it again in other words: You are under the impression that atheism is a religion, a set of believes when it couldn't be further from the reality. Atheism is the lack of a believe in a supernatural or anything that is not supported by evidence. So, repeating myself, if evidence is found to support an afterlife, I'll gladly change my point of view, until then, the only conclusion is that it doesn't exist.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


No, it is not simple logic. If it were, you would be demonstrating that logic instead of equivocating and deflecting as you are doing here.

Your pet dragon analogy fell apart a few posts back. You failed to respond to that point, but its conclusion still stands unless you can demonstrate the difference in kind between your pet dragon and my dream of a red pony based on the standards of evidence you set forth.

Forget the after-life. It is not the issue here. The strong claim is yolo, or life ends at death. What is the evidence you have to support this strong claim?

I am fully aware of what atheism is and isn't. Your argument is disingenuous. Strong atheism is indeed a claim that God does not exist, not merely a claim to not believe. This issue has been dealt with to death in the atheist community and things have evolved to the point where professing such a weak claim as yours will get you drummed out of many an atheist board.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 11375876


The evidence to support that there is no life after death is very simple. Its not observable, measurable or even probable.

Look at these two statements:
- I don't think that god exists
- I think that god doesn't exist

Can you spot the difference between them?
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


My dream of a red pony is not observable, measurable, or even probable, and you cannot falsify my claim. Yet you do not question that claim. Why?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 11375876


Simply because a dream is not reality, its nothing than your brain doing what it is supposed to do. But if you said you have a red pony in your closet, then it would be observable. Its like saying "I'm thinking about a lake right now", of course its not possible to measure or observe this it is only in my mind. But when I say: I know a being that created all lakes and oceans in this world, then you have the burden of proof.
MaybeTrollingU  (OP)

User ID: 75358302
Brazil
06/27/2018 02:53 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
And although I like to debate about it, it is kinda derailing the thread, I'm interested into religious people responses to the mental exercise proposed.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 76685084
United States
06/27/2018 03:11 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
Think about how ridiculous this statement is:

"The knowledge that I have about this universe and all the life forms therein is so insignificant, that it cannot even be measured. But, I put all my faith in that knowledge."

That is basically the argument being put forth.

chuckle
 Quoting: Laughing Falcon


There is no faith involved. And your analogy is very sneaky. Of course science doesn't know everything, of course its impossible to measure or even have an idea of how much we don't know. But what we do know is what we have to rely on. IMHO, its not wise to doubt we know for sure in detriment of the possibility of something we don't know to make it invalid. Knowledge evolves, our knowledge of reality evolves with it.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


There is great faith involved. Atheists dislike and even sometimes hate the word "faith." I find that of particular interest, psychologically speaking. There is often a visceral reaction to that word.

The fact remains that one thing that you can never dispute, is, that the knowledge that you have access to is so insignificant, it cannot even be measured as such. You have a belief that science is giving you as many of the answers that you need, for your comfort level, and in order to determine your set of beliefs about this life and beyond. A non belief is a belief no matter how you try to spin it. It's what you believe to be true based on your immeasurably insignificant scientific knowledge.

Another flaw of science, as a life belief, is the incomprehensible and immeasurable amount of information that is yet undiscovered, including the possibility of another dimension where unknown life forces may or may not exist.

But, do not hold your breath. If that dimension becomes discoverable and measurable in any significant way, you will be long dead.

I noticed you said this is "derailing" your thread. Now that the tough questions are coming, you want to go back to your "research." Interesting.
MaybeTrollingU  (OP)

User ID: 75358302
Brazil
06/27/2018 03:22 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
Think about how ridiculous this statement is:

"The knowledge that I have about this universe and all the life forms therein is so insignificant, that it cannot even be measured. But, I put all my faith in that knowledge."

That is basically the argument being put forth.

chuckle
 Quoting: Laughing Falcon


There is no faith involved. And your analogy is very sneaky. Of course science doesn't know everything, of course its impossible to measure or even have an idea of how much we don't know. But what we do know is what we have to rely on. IMHO, its not wise to doubt we know for sure in detriment of the possibility of something we don't know to make it invalid. Knowledge evolves, our knowledge of reality evolves with it.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


There is great faith involved. Atheists dislike and even sometimes hate the word "faith." I find that of particular interest, psychologically speaking. There is often a visceral reaction to that word.

The fact remains that one thing that you can never dispute, is, that the knowledge that you have access to is so insignificant, it cannot even be measured as such. You have a belief that science is giving you as many of the answers that you need, for your comfort level, and in order to determine your set of beliefs about this life and beyond. A non belief is a belief no matter how you try to spin it. It's what you believe to be true based on your immeasurably insignificant scientific knowledge.

Another flaw of science, as a life belief, is the incomprehensible and immeasurable amount of information that is yet undiscovered, including the possibility of another dimension where unknown life forces may or may not exist.

But, do not hold your breath. If that dimension becomes discoverable and measurable in any significant way, you will be long dead.

I noticed you said this is "derailing" your thread. Now that the tough questions are coming, you want to go back to your "research." Interesting.
 Quoting: Laughing Falcon


Besides what you may think, no, there is no faith involved even thou it seems that you very much like to classify it like this, I think I know why but its irrelevant. And I wouldn't classify any of my responses as "visceral". I think I've been polite as much as I can.

About science and its "answers". I already stated that I know that science has much, much yet to know, understand and even more to study. I don't think "it is giving me answers to my comfort level" or "set belief about this life and beyond". Again, we have to rely on what is known and understood, not dismiss it by the possibility of being wrong by, so far, unknown factors.

Again, science is not a life belief system, its more to a scrutiny method. And yes there is a possibility of "another dimension", but to what is known so far, it doesn't. It may be, in the future, discovered and studies about it begin, but disregarding or dismissing the known for the possible unknown is trading the right for the dubious.

Your questions are not tough as you may think. They are all very well known logical fallacies, used over and over by religious people that don't understand neither science nor logic enough to identify them as such. My research will continue, whether you want it or not.

I would gladly talk about logic, science and all that in another thread with you or anyone willing to have civilized conversation, but this one is to research religious people and their ability to think abstractly, at the very least the ability to strip down their faith and gnosis to think rationally.
MarPep

User ID: 76711952
United States
06/27/2018 03:23 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
Those who reject all religious dogma/doctrine naturally must choose a "philosophy of Life and behavior" to guide their actions, and those who fail to do so can not be considered as fully mature.

If we choose to desire/prefer Life, Truth, Love, Peace, Justice, and Liberty, many of us wind up with the same POVs and attitudes and reasons for action provided by Jesus in the New Testament. He, like Cicero 80 years earlier, also warned us about those who were known deceivers, murderers, and money/power worshipers. Arguments have been made that He was the most spiritually advanced human of all time . For those reasons, his views on the afterlife and God need to also be studied.

The church dogma from the Council of Nicea onward is suspect, IMO.

I want to add that Christians can be believers in evolution and in reincarnation.
 Quoting: MarPep


And I would add.. those of us who attempt to reach those desired principles of behavior have done so after long and careful observation and analysis--and thus we can have FAITH that we have chosen correctly. And we can have the HOPE of an afterlife without pain and suffering, and that any required payment for our sins has already been made--thru Christ. and thru our repentance.

Last Edited by MarPep on 06/27/2018 03:40 PM
_______________
They let me off with a warning and a couple of bullet holes.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 76685084
United States
06/27/2018 03:40 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
Think about how ridiculous this statement is:

"The knowledge that I have about this universe and all the life forms therein is so insignificant, that it cannot even be measured. But, I put all my faith in that knowledge."

That is basically the argument being put forth.

chuckle
 Quoting: Laughing Falcon


There is no faith involved. And your analogy is very sneaky. Of course science doesn't know everything, of course its impossible to measure or even have an idea of how much we don't know. But what we do know is what we have to rely on. IMHO, its not wise to doubt we know for sure in detriment of the possibility of something we don't know to make it invalid. Knowledge evolves, our knowledge of reality evolves with it.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


There is great faith involved. Atheists dislike and even sometimes hate the word "faith." I find that of particular interest, psychologically speaking. There is often a visceral reaction to that word.

The fact remains that one thing that you can never dispute, is, that the knowledge that you have access to is so insignificant, it cannot even be measured as such. You have a belief that science is giving you as many of the answers that you need, for your comfort level, and in order to determine your set of beliefs about this life and beyond. A non belief is a belief no matter how you try to spin it. It's what you believe to be true based on your immeasurably insignificant scientific knowledge.

Another flaw of science, as a life belief, is the incomprehensible and immeasurable amount of information that is yet undiscovered, including the possibility of another dimension where unknown life forces may or may not exist.

But, do not hold your breath. If that dimension becomes discoverable and measurable in any significant way, you will be long dead.

I noticed you said this is "derailing" your thread. Now that the tough questions are coming, you want to go back to your "research." Interesting.
 Quoting: Laughing Falcon


Besides what you may think, no, there is no faith involved even thou it seems that you very much like to classify it like this, I think I know why but its irrelevant. And I wouldn't classify any of my responses as "visceral". I think I've been polite as much as I can.

About science and its "answers". I already stated that I know that science has much, much yet to know, understand and even more to study. I don't think "it is giving me answers to my comfort level" or "set belief about this life and beyond". Again, we have to rely on what is known and understood, not dismiss it by the possibility of being wrong by, so far, unknown factors.

Again, science is not a life belief system, its more to a scrutiny method. And yes there is a possibility of "another dimension", but to what is known so far, it doesn't. It may be, in the future, discovered and studies about it begin, but disregarding or dismissing the known for the possible unknown is trading the right for the dubious.

Your questions are not tough as you may think. They are all very well known logical fallacies, used over and over by religious people that don't understand neither science nor logic enough to identify them as such. My research will continue, whether you want it or not.

I would gladly talk about logic, science and all that in another thread with you or anyone willing to have civilized conversation, but this one is to research religious people and their ability to think abstractly, at the very least the ability to strip down their faith and gnosis to think rationally.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


Your knowledge base is immeasurably insignificant. That says a great deal.

The questions are tough when one considers how little they actually know to be true compared to all available knowledge that exists. Well, for the intellectually honest that is true. For you to say these questions are not difficult, says a lot.

But, what says the most is your unwillingness to honestly answer your own question, (although you "claim" to have) whilst placing that burden upon others. That really sums it all up quite concisely.

I'll take off now and leave you to your research.
MaybeTrollingU  (OP)

User ID: 75358302
Brazil
06/27/2018 03:48 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
...


There is no faith involved. And your analogy is very sneaky. Of course science doesn't know everything, of course its impossible to measure or even have an idea of how much we don't know. But what we do know is what we have to rely on. IMHO, its not wise to doubt we know for sure in detriment of the possibility of something we don't know to make it invalid. Knowledge evolves, our knowledge of reality evolves with it.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


There is great faith involved. Atheists dislike and even sometimes hate the word "faith." I find that of particular interest, psychologically speaking. There is often a visceral reaction to that word.

The fact remains that one thing that you can never dispute, is, that the knowledge that you have access to is so insignificant, it cannot even be measured as such. You have a belief that science is giving you as many of the answers that you need, for your comfort level, and in order to determine your set of beliefs about this life and beyond. A non belief is a belief no matter how you try to spin it. It's what you believe to be true based on your immeasurably insignificant scientific knowledge.

Another flaw of science, as a life belief, is the incomprehensible and immeasurable amount of information that is yet undiscovered, including the possibility of another dimension where unknown life forces may or may not exist.

But, do not hold your breath. If that dimension becomes discoverable and measurable in any significant way, you will be long dead.

I noticed you said this is "derailing" your thread. Now that the tough questions are coming, you want to go back to your "research." Interesting.
 Quoting: Laughing Falcon


Besides what you may think, no, there is no faith involved even thou it seems that you very much like to classify it like this, I think I know why but its irrelevant. And I wouldn't classify any of my responses as "visceral". I think I've been polite as much as I can.

About science and its "answers". I already stated that I know that science has much, much yet to know, understand and even more to study. I don't think "it is giving me answers to my comfort level" or "set belief about this life and beyond". Again, we have to rely on what is known and understood, not dismiss it by the possibility of being wrong by, so far, unknown factors.

Again, science is not a life belief system, its more to a scrutiny method. And yes there is a possibility of "another dimension", but to what is known so far, it doesn't. It may be, in the future, discovered and studies about it begin, but disregarding or dismissing the known for the possible unknown is trading the right for the dubious.

Your questions are not tough as you may think. They are all very well known logical fallacies, used over and over by religious people that don't understand neither science nor logic enough to identify them as such. My research will continue, whether you want it or not.

I would gladly talk about logic, science and all that in another thread with you or anyone willing to have civilized conversation, but this one is to research religious people and their ability to think abstractly, at the very least the ability to strip down their faith and gnosis to think rationally.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


Your knowledge base is immeasurably insignificant. That says a great deal.

The questions are tough when one considers how little they actually know to be true compared to all available knowledge that exists. Well, for the intellectually honest that is true. For you to say these questions are not difficult, says a lot.

But, what says the most is your unwillingness to honestly answer your own question, (although you "claim" to have) whilst placing that burden upon others. That really sums it all up quite concisely.

I'll take off now and leave you to your research.
 Quoting: Laughing Falcon


Ok, thank you for the conversation!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 11375876
United States
06/27/2018 04:14 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
...


No, it is not simple logic. If it were, you would be demonstrating that logic instead of equivocating and deflecting as you are doing here.

Your pet dragon analogy fell apart a few posts back. You failed to respond to that point, but its conclusion still stands unless you can demonstrate the difference in kind between your pet dragon and my dream of a red pony based on the standards of evidence you set forth.

Forget the after-life. It is not the issue here. The strong claim is yolo, or life ends at death. What is the evidence you have to support this strong claim?

I am fully aware of what atheism is and isn't. Your argument is disingenuous. Strong atheism is indeed a claim that God does not exist, not merely a claim to not believe. This issue has been dealt with to death in the atheist community and things have evolved to the point where professing such a weak claim as yours will get you drummed out of many an atheist board.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 11375876


The evidence to support that there is no life after death is very simple. Its not observable, measurable or even probable.

Look at these two statements:
- I don't think that god exists
- I think that god doesn't exist

Can you spot the difference between them?
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


My dream of a red pony is not observable, measurable, or even probable, and you cannot falsify my claim. Yet you do not question that claim. Why?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 11375876


Simply because a dream is not reality, its nothing than your brain doing what it is supposed to do. But if you said you have a red pony in your closet, then it would be observable. Its like saying "I'm thinking about a lake right now", of course its not possible to measure or observe this it is only in my mind. But when I say: I know a being that created all lakes and oceans in this world, then you have the burden of proof.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


My red pony isn't reality? How can you even say that when you know exactly what I am talking about and didn't challenge it on any level? Are you saying you blindly believe in unreality to the point of not even questioning it? Interesting.

As for your saying it is nothing more than my brain doing what it is supposed to do, this is an ignorant comment based on nothing more than your received belief that science has this stuff all figured out. If you think science understands why we dream, you are sadly mistaken.

Regardless, you keep dodging the point. Although the strong claim of yolo is the de facto belief of materialistic atheism, it is absolutely unsupportable by logic or reason. It doesn't even have any anecdotal evidence to support it. It is merely a claim made out of the air with no underlying support whatsoever.

It doesn't matter what anyone else thinks about the afterlife or whether they can support it. The point is that far from being guided by reason, logic, and evidence as they claim, atheists are just as faith based as anyone else.

And, as you are showing most wonderfully, when presented with arguments that challenge their cherished beliefs, instead of countering with reason, logic, or evidence, they will simply slide by those arguments just like so many religionists do.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 11375876
United States
06/27/2018 04:22 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
And although I like to debate about it, it is kinda derailing the thread, I'm interested into religious people responses to the mental exercise proposed.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


I can see why you are wanting to change the subject. But please keep in mind that you are just as religious as anyone because you have chosen to believe based on faith just as anyone else. Your faith may be in different sources, but it is faith all the same. This doesn't make it a bad thing, just a more accurate reflection of your worldview because to some degree faith is inescapable.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 72341210
United States
06/27/2018 04:38 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
This is so bizarre. You are trying to moderate as if you have some authority.

Then you make a totally weird intellectual exercise that no teacher of philosophy would ever allow as it's so biased.

Then you make weird comments as if grading responses when you yourself make errors in claims.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 72341210


I disagree on it being biased. On the contrary, I'm asking for an answer detached of all religious bias.

And I do moderate things that go against the purpose of the exercise.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU

Nope as atheism is based on your faith that GOD is not real, then YOU have a religious bias. You have no evidence. And it's an outrageous claim that nothing whatsoever can create INFINITE MASS!

This is so funny.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 72341210
United States
06/27/2018 04:40 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Friendly discussion and thought exercise to religious people
...


I suspect you may be trolling xD
Right?
Religion is useless, as is your discussion, there is obviously a Higher Being, call it whatever you want.
If you are unable to see the hand of The Artist on everything arround you, then you are just a very ignorant (probably too young to know better) person.

stoner
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 76692895


I'm not trolling in this one. And "there is obviously a higher being, is a claim not supported by evidence.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


On what basis do you make this claim, op? I ask because it is taken as an article of faith by atheists and agnostics as if it were a given. But when you try to establish what would constitute evidence, there is no clear answer. It is difficult to judge what is true or false when there isn't even an agreement on the measuring stick in use.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 11375876


Atheism is exactly the opposite, its the lack of belief. And no, lack of belief is not the same as believing in something. Evidence is something the furnishes proof. Both these concepts, proof and evidence, are subject to logic, if it can be falsified by logic, is not evidence or proof. That's my take on the subject thou and definitive definitions may vary a little bit. But there is a consensus on what evidence and proof are NOT. Being subjected to scientific method must be applicable.
 Quoting: MaybeTrollingU


Right HERE the OP shows he is being a CHARLATAN. I provided a link with multiple academic sources that clearly states that atheism is a strong disbelief in YHWH.

Atheism IS NOT a lack of belief!





GLP