Total Posts:90|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Which?

GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2009 3:33:58 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
"If you believe in God, that belief which would remain in the physical universe is transported to the belief in God, who is eternal. Thus you have universal knowledge. If you do not believe in God, that belief which everyone must have remains in the universe and is used up on believing something is universally knowledgeable."

There will be some who will some how find a way around this, possibly. Any arguments against this quote?
leet4A1
Posts: 1,986
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2009 3:51:48 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/18/2009 3:33:58 PM, GodSands wrote:
"If you believe in God, that belief which would remain in the physical universe is transported to the belief in God, who is eternal. Thus you have universal knowledge. If you do not believe in God, that belief which everyone must have remains in the universe and is used up on believing something is universally knowledgeable."

There will be some who will some how find a way around this, possibly. Any arguments against this quote?

Nobody cares sorry mate. Everyone has realized that any answer they give will be met with unwillingness or inability to understand on your behalf.
"Let me tell you the truth. The truth is, 'what is'. And 'what should be' is a fantasy, a terrible terrible lie that someone gave to the people long ago. The 'what should be' never did exist, but people keep trying to live up to it. There is no 'what should be,' there is only what is." - Lenny Bruce

"Satan goes to church, did you know that?" - Godsands

"And Genisis 1 does match modern science... you just have to try really hard." - GR33K FR33K5
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2009 3:54:18 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
: At 11/18/2009 3:51:48 PM, leet4A1 wrote:
At 11/18/2009 3:33:58 PM, GodSands wrote:
"If you believe in God, that belief which would remain in the physical universe is transported to the belief in God, who is eternal. Thus you have universal knowledge. If you do not believe in God, that belief which everyone must have remains in the universe and is used up on believing something is universally knowledgeable."

There will be some who will some how find a way around this, possibly. Any arguments against this quote?

Nobody cares sorry mate. Everyone has realized that any answer they give will be met with unwillingness or inability to understand on your behalf.


Sure, I will believe that. Answer it for your sake, not mine.
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2009 4:01:09 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/18/2009 3:54:18 PM, GodSands wrote:
: At 11/18/2009 3:51:48 PM, leet4A1 wrote:
At 11/18/2009 3:33:58 PM, GodSands wrote:
"If you believe in God, that belief which would remain in the physical universe is transported to the belief in God, who is eternal. Thus you have universal knowledge. If you do not believe in God, that belief which everyone must have remains in the universe and is used up on believing something is universally knowledgeable."

There will be some who will some how find a way around this, possibly. Any arguments against this quote?

Nobody cares sorry mate. Everyone has realized that any answer they give will be met with unwillingness or inability to understand on your behalf.


Sure, I will believe that. Answer it for your sake, not mine.

Yes, I have developed a very good argument against the quote, and my answer leads me further away from accepting Christianity.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2009 4:03:06 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
: At 11/18/2009 4:01:09 PM, Kleptin wrote:
At 11/18/2009 3:54:18 PM, GodSands wrote:
: At 11/18/2009 3:51:48 PM, leet4A1 wrote:
At 11/18/2009 3:33:58 PM, GodSands wrote:
"If you believe in God, that belief which would remain in the physical universe is transported to the belief in God, who is eternal. Thus you have universal knowledge. If you do not believe in God, that belief which everyone must have remains in the universe and is used up on believing something is universally knowledgeable."

There will be some who will some how find a way around this, possibly. Any arguments against this quote?

Nobody cares sorry mate. Everyone has realized that any answer they give will be met with unwillingness or inability to understand on your behalf.


Sure, I will believe that. Answer it for your sake, not mine.

Yes, I have developed a very good argument against the quote, and my answer leads me further away from accepting Christianity.


What's that?
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2009 4:05:04 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/18/2009 3:33:58 PM, GodSands wrote:
"If you believe in God, that belief which would remain in the physical universe is transported to the belief in God, who is eternal. Thus you have universal knowledge. If you do not believe in God, that belief which everyone must have remains in the universe and is used up on believing something is universally knowledgeable."

There will be some who will some how find a way around this, possibly. Any arguments against this quote?

Yes, it makes no sense at all.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2009 4:08:05 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
By the way, nothing but Jesus Christ and the understanding of your sin is unrighteous will ever convert you to be allowed into the Kingdom of heaven righteously. None of my quotations will EVER change one to Christianity but Christ. I may bring someone to believe in a god yet I cannot bring anyone to the Christian God of love, righteousness and justice. Only repentence of sin, confession of sin through Christ Jesus can do such a task, which only God can deal with.
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2009 4:25:51 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
: At 11/19/2009 4:05:04 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 11/18/2009 3:33:58 PM, GodSands wrote:
"If you believe in God, that belief which would remain in the physical universe is transported to the belief in God, who is eternal. Thus you have universal knowledge. If you do not believe in God, that belief which everyone must have remains in the universe and is used up on believing something is universally knowledgeable."

There will be some who will some how find a way around this, possibly. Any arguments against this quote?

Yes, it makes no sense at all.


It makes sense, the belief in God makes the visible knowledgeable because the part of believing in God is that He created all things. Therefore all the things which are knowlegdeable to God and knowledgeable to someone who believes in God also. Because an atheist is someone who does not believe in God, their belief is placed not on the unseen but on the seen, in that they believe what they see is real. Therefore knowledge, which everyone claims to have, is really not knowledge but only something they believe in knowledge, which defines the whole point of knowledge.
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2009 4:43:22 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
(Just added notes, same as the old version above)

It makes sense, the belief in God makes the visible knowledgeable because the part of believing in God is that He created all things. Therefore all the things which are knowlegdeable to God are knowledgeable to someone who believes in God also. Because an atheist is someone who does not believe in God, their belief is placed not on the unseen but on the seen, in that they believe what they sense is real. Therefore knowledge, which everyone claims to have, is really not knowledge but only something they believe is knowledge, which defines the whole point of knowledge. Therefore they know nothing only believe. You know stuff according to your society though, I'll give you that.

God gives us that ability to know things, as it say, seek God and all other things wioll be given onto you.
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2009 5:12:07 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/19/2009 4:43:22 AM, GodSands wrote:
(Just added notes, same as the old version above)

It makes sense, the belief in God makes the visible knowledgeable because the part of believing in God is that He created all things. Therefore all the things which are knowlegdeable to God are knowledgeable to someone who believes in God also.

Erm no. Belief in, as in, agreement with =/= 2-way psychic connection. You are saying you are as knowledgeable *as* God? You are *Godly* in knowledge? The only way that works is if God's intelligence and knowledge is at the same level of yours, absurd, given the number of individuals with expertise which you do not have. I would not hold even you, to that level of degenerate standard and
still call it worthwhile to worship.

Because an atheist is someone who does not believe in God, their belief is placed not on the unseen but on the seen, in that they believe what they sense is real.

No; atheism is a statement in relation to the belief on the existence of god(s)(metaphysical claim) not about how knowledge is formed (epistemological claim).

Therefore knowledge, which everyone claims to have, is really not knowledge but only something they believe is knowledge, which defines the whole point of knowledge.

Knowledge =/= belief, they are not synonymous here. You have a belief, you are saying you are agreeing with a certain statement, whether that is knowledge is whether that belief is an accurate reflection of reality.

Therefore they know nothing only believe. You know stuff according to your society though, I'll give you that.

If I hold an accurate reflection of reality, I have knowledge of something, my belief is in relation to that knowledge claim. I believe rain falls from clouds is a belief statement, it is knowledge if it is empirically or logically true, when stating, rain comes from clouds.

God gives us that ability to know things, as it say, seek God and all other things wioll be given onto you.

Rubbish.
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2009 7:20:05 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
Erm no. Belief in, as in, agreement with =/= 2-way psychic connection. ?

You are saying you are as knowledgeable *as* God? You are *Godly* in knowledge? The only way that works is if God's intelligence and knowledge is at the same level of yours, absurd, given the number of individuals with expertise which you do not have. I would not hold even you, to that level of degenerate standard and still call it worthwhile to worship.

No, I am not saying just because you believe in God, you become knowledgeable like God. You can know things like God does.

No; atheism is a statement in relation to the belief on the existence of god(s)(metaphysical claim) not about how knowledge is formed (epistemological claim).

An atheist does not believe in any god(s). Ok end of that. Knowledge is only formed when there is a believe, believe first and all will be given onto you, knowledge = wisdom. You do not have knowledge first then a belief.

: Knowledge =/= belief, they are not synonymous here. You have a belief, you are saying you are agreeing with a certain statement, whether that is knowledge is whether that belief is an accurate reflection of reality.

You will never know anything in terms of what is reality unless there is a God, but you will only know things according to our society. Which might not be reality, well I for one know the Christian God, meaning that I know that we are living in reality. If I just said God, I cannot know God, but I can know the Christian God. Not just know about Him, but really know Him.

: If I hold an accurate reflection of reality, I have knowledge of something, my belief is in relation to that knowledge claim. I believe rain falls from clouds is a belief statement, it is knowledge if it is empirically or logically true, when stating, rain comes from clouds.

Explain to me what reality is, universal reality, not your reality. Then you may say if you know anything. Yes rain falls from clouds, but that as you said is founded by empirically or logically truths. But without God it gives no reason to suggest why rain should fall from the clouds, making your reality a possible delusion. But mine a correct reality because God made rain fall as so.

"Rubbish." - Punk says.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2009 7:50:40 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/19/2009 4:25:51 AM, GodSands wrote:

It makes sense, the belief in God makes the visible knowledgeable because the part of believing in God is that He created all things. Therefore all the things which are knowlegdeable to God and knowledgeable to someone who believes in God also. Because an atheist is someone who does not believe in God, their belief is placed not on the unseen but on the seen, in that they believe what they see is real. Therefore knowledge, which everyone claims to have, is really not knowledge but only something they believe in knowledge, which defines the whole point of knowledge.

I agree that the knowledge i have is not absolute, it only seems so, due to regular patterns of sensation I have, along with ideas from trusted sources, the reason I don't believe in a god is that I have never had the regular sensations which would suggest such a thing, and I don't much trust others as sources in this regard, since what they say isn't at all consistent with my sensation.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2009 8:41:00 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
: At 11/19/2009 7:50:40 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 11/19/2009 4:25:51 AM, GodSands wrote:

It makes sense, the belief in God makes the visible knowledgeable because the part of believing in God is that He created all things. Therefore all the things which are knowlegdeable to God and knowledgeable to someone who believes in God also. Because an atheist is someone who does not believe in God, their belief is placed not on the unseen but on the seen, in that they believe what they see is real. Therefore knowledge, which everyone claims to have, is really not knowledge but only something they believe in knowledge, which defines the whole point of knowledge.

I agree that the knowledge i have is not absolute, it only seems so, due to regular patterns of sensation I have, along with ideas from trusted sources, the reason I don't believe in a god is that I have never had the regular sensations which would suggest such a thing, and I don't much trust others as sources in this regard, since what they say isn't at all consistent with my sensation.


We are all born into sin, and because of that we are all under God's Grace since Jesus died. The reason you have never felt God, is not so much that you feel you haven't felt Him, but that you have always felt God's Grace. As soon as His Grace is gone you will know the difference or unless you truely accept Jesus and then, that way you will know the difference.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2009 10:08:12 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/19/2009 4:25:51 AM, GodSands wrote:
: At 11/19/2009 4:05:04 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 11/18/2009 3:33:58 PM, GodSands wrote:
"If you believe in God, that belief which would remain in the physical universe is transported to the belief in God, who is eternal. Thus you have universal knowledge. If you do not believe in God, that belief which everyone must have remains in the universe and is used up on believing something is universally knowledgeable."

There will be some who will some how find a way around this, possibly. Any arguments against this quote?

Yes, it makes no sense at all.


It makes sense,

No it does not, you have taken the English language clubbed it round the back of the head and as it's come round you have proceeded to urinate liberally over it's face.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2009 10:14:34 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
: At 11/19/2009 10:08:12 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 11/19/2009 4:25:51 AM, GodSands wrote:
: At 11/19/2009 4:05:04 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 11/18/2009 3:33:58 PM, GodSands wrote:
"If you believe in God, that belief which would remain in the physical universe is transported to the belief in God, who is eternal. Thus you have universal knowledge. If you do not believe in God, that belief which everyone must have remains in the universe and is used up on believing something is universally knowledgeable."

There will be some who will some how find a way around this, possibly. Any arguments against this quote?

Yes, it makes no sense at all.


It makes sense,

No it does not, you have taken the English language clubbed it round the back of the head and as it's come round you have proceeded to urinate liberally over it's face.


Either it makes sense or you do not understand it, most likely you do not understand. And if you want to ask me how it makes sense, send me a message.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2009 10:41:54 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/19/2009 10:14:34 AM, GodSands wrote:
: At 11/19/2009 10:08:12 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 11/19/2009 4:25:51 AM, GodSands wrote:
: At 11/19/2009 4:05:04 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 11/18/2009 3:33:58 PM, GodSands wrote:
"If you believe in God, that belief which would remain in the physical universe is transported to the belief in God, who is eternal. Thus you have universal knowledge. If you do not believe in God, that belief which everyone must have remains in the universe and is used up on believing something is universally knowledgeable."

There will be some who will some how find a way around this, possibly. Any arguments against this quote?

Yes, it makes no sense at all.


It makes sense,

No it does not, you have taken the English language clubbed it round the back of the head and as it's come round you have proceeded to urinate liberally over it's face.


Either it makes sense or you do not understand it, most likely you do not understand. And if you want to ask me how it makes sense, send me a message.

It does not make sense in English. Therefore it can not be understood, please preach in English or not at all.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
alto2osu
Posts: 277
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2009 10:49:14 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
I'm not sure that this quotation isn't simply illogical, rather than incomprehensible. I wonder if the original poster wouldn't mind articulating the link story between belief in an "eternal god" and access to universal knowledge? The quotation seems to imply that something related to something else with the quality of being eternal then links automatically to universality.

I'd also prefer that it be done here, rather than in a PM. PMs do the thread itself no good.
alto2osu
Posts: 277
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2009 10:55:28 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
After reading the entire thread (missed a few posts), I see that my question has already been presented, but not answered adequately. Essentially, believing in a proposed supremely knowledgeable deity does not give me access to that deity's infinite wisdom. In fact, from my understanding of the Christian faith (I was one, after all, for like 17 years) is that this particular view would be looked upon unfavorably.

Lest, of course, previous explanations given by the original poster have misrepresented the intent of the quotation.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2009 1:56:54 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/18/2009 3:33:58 PM, GodSands wrote:
"If you believe in God, that belief which would remain in the physical universe is transported to the belief in God, who is eternal. Thus you have universal knowledge. If you do not believe in God, that belief which everyone must have remains in the universe and is used up on believing something is universally knowledgeable."


This is somewhat incomprehensible, but nonetheless I shall tackle it.

Firstly, you claim someone can have universal knowledge due to a relationship with God. So, prove someone who is one with God does indeed have universal knowledge.

The part about not believing in God is pretty damn incomprehensible, but you seem to be almost contradicting yourself. You claim, if you believe in God you get "Universal knowledge", and if you don't you believe in "universally knowledgeable" things. How are these two different? As besides, Non-theists believe in knowledgeable things. Any knowledge by Theists that is universal could easily be fallible.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2009 3:30:31 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/19/2009 7:20:05 AM, GodSands wrote:

No, I am not saying just because you believe in God, you become knowledgeable like God. You can know things like God does.

That just creates a whole new mess. You know 'like' he does? So what, you know like an omniscient being does? Fail again, you are barely educated. You *learn* like he does? You just said you learn by believing in God, so that makes God believing in a God to learn. Try again.

An atheist does not believe in any god(s). Ok end of that. Knowledge is only formed when there is a believe, believe first and all will be given onto you, knowledge = wisdom. You do not have knowledge first then a belief.

Ehhhh. You have reality. You have knowledge of reality (you can gain this, if you think otherwise you may as well die).

Beliefs may be foundationless (I have an invisible dragon in my yard), so they are removed from any knowledge claim, they may also be based upon knowledge claims: I believe rain comes from clouds. In which case the knowledge that rain comes from clouds *preceedes* that belief statement.

You will never know anything in terms of what is reality unless there is a God, but you will only know things according to our society.

Ipse dixit. Plus you are presuming *my* epistemological base is some absurd relativistic sort.


Explain to me what reality is, universal reality, not your reality. Then you may say if you know anything. Yes rain falls from clouds, but that as you said is founded by empirically or logically truths. But without God it gives no reason to suggest why rain should fall from the clouds, making your reality a possible delusion. But mine a correct reality because God made rain fall as so.

Reality is that which is. Unless you propose your mind can change that which is by mere wishing (raises a whole new set of fail but anyway) your claim that I need God to know, is baseless.
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/20/2009 6:12:26 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
That just creates a whole new mess. You know 'like' he does? So what, you know like an omniscient being does? Fail again, you are barely educated. You *learn* like he does? You just said you learn by believing in God, so that makes God believing in a God to learn. Try again.

No, you totally mis read what I said, again. Now listen to me, because I have a belief in an eternal source, aka God. I can know for sure what knowledge is. But that does not mean I know everything like God does.

: Ehhhh. You have reality. You have knowledge of reality (you can gain this, if you think otherwise you may as well die).

You can gain 'personal knowledge' by simply living, but because it is personal does not mean it is true knowledge. This really only comes into play only when you have to trust your senses, that what you sense is the true reality, and not to goofy make belief reality. God covers and gives a good explanation to a particular person that what they sense is true universal reality.

: Beliefs may be foundationless (I have an invisible dragon in my yard), so they are removed from any knowledge claim, they may also be based upon knowledge claims: I believe rain comes from clouds. In which case the knowledge that rain comes from clouds *preceedes* that belief statement.

Beliefs are your foundations, under them continues the recurrence of the where did that come from demon, however if you believe in God, you can just say, "He is eternal, he has always existed." You know rain comes from the clouds according to your senses, in tern you have to trust as the basis of reality, true reality. Whereas my basis of reality is God and not my senses, because of this reason I know for fact, universal fact that rain comes from clouds.

: Ipse dixit. Plus you are presuming *my* epistemological base is some absurd relativistic sort.

No, I can account for you, because you are like me, a person. So I can say there is a God in your life too pleadingyou to come to know Him through Jesus Christ. Thus I add you as apart of my reality with a basis, a fountation which is an eternal source, God. Although you will not believe me in this, because you are certian that your reality is correct, but how? You have not even touched down on a sustainable foundation to support your reality.

Reality is that which is. Unless you propose your mind can change that which is by mere wishing (raises a whole new set of fail but anyway) your claim that I need God to know, is baseless.

Reality can which is baseless is fasle. A reality with a questionless foundation is reality. For what makes up reality is not what so much goes on in the reality, but what it is sustained on. In other words, a lot of people may hate true reality. False realities will be true in parts because they are originate from the true reality which is God.

My claim that you need God isn't baseless, you need Him because you will go to hell unless you have Him. Because of we were separated from God's love we all must reconnect via His Son Jesus Christ. Because of your inderpendence from God, by ingorning Him, saying He does not exist. In that you would say, "No I am not even ignoring Him, He does not exist, and I cannot ignore Him because God does not exist." Because you have done that, and sinned because of this, you will be thrown into hell because of that very reason. Unless you hold tight onto Jesus Christ for your life.
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/20/2009 6:16:12 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
: At 11/19/2009 10:55:28 AM, alto2osu wrote:
After reading the entire thread (missed a few posts), I see that my question has already been presented, but not answered adequately. Essentially, believing in a proposed supremely knowledgeable deity does not give me access to that deity's infinite wisdom. In fact, from my understanding of the Christian faith (I was one, after all, for like 17 years) is that this particular view would be looked upon unfavorably.

Lest, of course, previous explanations given by the original poster have misrepresented the intent of the quotation.


Ok, send me any questions on this forum, and what happened to your apparent Christian life? You could have just been a lost church member, just because you claim Jesus as Lord, does not mean you are a Christian (Matthew 7:21-23).
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/20/2009 3:50:57 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/19/2009 4:03:06 AM, GodSands wrote:
At 11/18/2009 4:01:09 PM, Kleptin wrote:
Yes, I have developed a very good argument against the quote, and my answer leads me further away from accepting Christianity.

What's that?

You told me to answer it for my sake and not yours. Do you want me to answer it to you now then?

If so, then answer these questions:

1. Do you really think YOU can point out a logical flaw in my thinking?
2. Do you really think you're competent enough to even UNDERSTAND my thinking?
3. Even if you are, would you ever adopt my explanation if it meant giving up God?

If you answered yes to all three, I'll tell you.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2009 4:18:25 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
: At 11/20/2009 3:50:57 PM, Kleptin wrote:
At 11/19/2009 4:03:06 AM, GodSands wrote:
At 11/18/2009 4:01:09 PM, Kleptin wrote:
Yes, I have developed a very good argument against the quote, and my answer leads me further away from accepting Christianity.

What's that?

You told me to answer it for my sake and not yours. Do you want me to answer it to you now then?

If so, then answer these questions:

1. Do you really think YOU can point out a logical flaw in my thinking?
2. Do you really think you're competent enough to even UNDERSTAND my thinking?
3. Even if you are, would you ever adopt my explanation if it meant giving up God?

If you answered yes to all three, I'll tell you.

1. I hope so.
2. I hope so.
3. I wouldn't ever give up God, He is not just apart of my logical thinking in philosophy, but He is true to me in my life generally, day in, day out. As a Father.

Ok what's this you got up your sleve, come on tell me.
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2009 4:58:44 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/20/2009 6:12:26 AM, GodSands wrote:

No, you totally mis read what I said, again. Now listen to me, because I have a belief in an eternal source, aka God. I can know for sure what knowledge is.

Nope, you are asserting your *belief* i.e your agreement that god exists is *sufficient* for any consequent beliefs. You are still missing the supportive premises for it all. In essence saying, my faith is my epistemological stance.

But that does not mean I know everything like God does.

Fantastic.

You can gain 'personal knowledge' by simply living, but because it is personal does not mean it is true knowledge.

A person notices rain falls when there are clouds around. He notices it doesn't rain when there are no clouds. How is his personal knowledge, that rain comes from clouds a *false* account of reality? Knowledge is awareness of a fact of reality; if I am aware of a facet of reality, I have knowledge.

This really only comes into play only when you have to trust your senses, that what you sense is the true reality, and not to goofy make belief reality. God covers and gives a good explanation to a particular person that what they sense is true universal reality.

Nope, that doesn't resolve any solipsist notion of the universe at all.

Beliefs are your foundations, under them continues the recurrence of the where did that come from demon,

1. I don't believe in demons so wtf are you talking about.

2. You are apparently ignoring whatever else I say. Knowledge can be a foundation for beliefs, it is YOU however that asserts belief as primacy over knowledge, calling it faith. Your faith comes prior to your knowledge claims about that faith.

however if you believe in God, you can just say, "He is eternal, he has always existed." You know rain comes from the clouds according to your senses, in tern you have to trust as the basis of reality, true reality.

Trust no, logically valid premises supported by valid empirics. Saying 'God exists' tells you nothing about the nature of reality except that sole metaphysical claim.

Whereas my basis of reality is God and not my senses, because of this reason I know for fact, universal fact that rain comes from clouds.

That's a horrendous non sequitur. God exists therefore rain comes from clouds. You are missing the in between parts. ;)

1. How do you know it is raining if you are using no sensory data?

2. How do you know what rain is, if your knowledge base was without sensory input.

3. How do you know what a cloud is, if your knowledge base was without sensory input.

4. How do you know what falling is, if your knowledge base was without sensory input.

etc.

No, I can account for you, because you are like me, a person.

Just because we share are DNA base does not make our epistemological stance similar nor shared nor universal. The fact I disagree with others that disagree with you should be ample a warning light that lumping all people into the one group is baseless.

So I can say there is a God in your life too pleadingyou to come to know Him through Jesus Christ.

Sure you can imagine that all you like. Thankfully your imagination does not construe reality.

Thus I add you as apart of my reality with a basis, a fountation which is an eternal source, God.

I exist because God exists. Great, and? That's basically a summary of Genesis Chapter 1.

Although you will not believe me in this, because you are certian that your reality is correct, but how?

Frankly because your ability to understand the argument I doubt at - it is based off certain axioms and their corollaries.

Reality can which is baseless is fasle.

Wut? Realit is that which is - even you would agree with that, in essence stating reality is existence.

A reality with a questionless foundation is reality. For what makes up reality is not what so much goes on in the reality, but what it is sustained on. In other words, a lot of people may hate true reality. False realities will be true in parts because they are originate from the true reality which is God.

Sustained? Learn some physics.

My claim that you need God isn't baseless, you need Him because you will go to hell unless you have Him.

ipse dixit, circular.

sermon

Save it for Sundays.
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2009 9:01:19 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
Nope, you are asserting your *belief* i.e your agreement that god exists is *sufficient* for any consequent beliefs. You are still missing the supportive premises for it all. In essence saying, my faith is my epistemological stance.

God is necessary, after you have God, then we can start talking about sufficient things. You are trying to cook an egg without heat here.

A person notices rain falls when there are clouds around. He notices it doesn't rain when there are no clouds. How is his personal knowledge, that rain comes from clouds a *false* account of reality? Knowledge is awareness of a fact of reality; if I am aware of a facet of reality, I have knowledge.

Connecting to solipsism here, where Descartes idea of the only thing that really exist is your mind and everything else is just a hallusination made up of your mind. In your own mind rain falls from the clouds, and it your own mind others notice rain coming from clouds like you do. Without God this is a very, if impossible problem for you to over come. So yes you have knowledge that rain falls from clouds, but only empirical knowledge, not reasonable knowledge. In other words universal knowledge.

Nope, that doesn't resolve any solipsist notion of the universe at all.

I see you already know about solipsism.

1. I don't believe in demons so wtf are you talking about.

I was not talking of a demon as such, but you know when young children say, "What's that made of?" and, "Where did that come from?" Until you have no answer. That is where you will find your beliefs, in your case they are floating of nothing.

2. You are apparently ignoring whatever else I say. Knowledge can be a foundation for beliefs, it is YOU however that asserts belief as primacy over knowledge, calling it faith. Your faith comes prior to your knowledge claims about that faith.

What do you think universal knowledge is?

Trust no, logically valid premises supported by valid empirics. Saying 'God exists' tells you nothing about the nature of reality except that sole metaphysical claim.

The whole point to truth is that because we cannot sense it, we must, must believe in it. Along with that you use logic to discover what truth is, by narrowing it down you will find God. You may finally come to the conclusion that God is the only answer in 5, 10, 15 years, or when you die, but the answer is God. Please find me an answer which matches up to God, if not, God is the answer. (Psalm 14:1).

That's a horrendous non sequitur. God exists therefore rain comes from clouds. You are missing the in between parts. ;)

No, God exists, I believe in God, therefore I know rain SHOULD (not could or does) come from clouds.

: 1. How do you know it is raining if you are using no sensory data?

But I am using my sensers. God created them.

2. How do you know what rain is, if your knowledge base was without sensory input.

Thats the whole point, God gave us our 5 senses, so that we can enjoy the things He has created. Rain is water which comes from clouds. And this goes for your numbers 3 and 4 questions. God created us with 5 senses, and with those senses we can logically find out where our universe came from, without going down the pointless road of goose chase (Big Bang). That leads nowhere and you will learn one day that you might as well have gone straight to God

Just because we share are DNA base does not make our epistemological stance similar nor shared nor universal. The fact I disagree with others that disagree with you should be ample a warning light that lumping all people into the one group is baseless.

You have seen things like I have, smelt things like I have, heard things like me, tastes, and touched things like I have, so I can accout for you.

I exist because God exists. Great, and? That's basically a summary of Genesis Chapter 1.

Yes in short, yes that is why you exist.

Frankly because your ability to understand the argument I doubt at - it is based off certain axioms and their corollaries.

Don't even understand this, explain?

Wut? Realit is that which is - even you would agree with that, in essence stating reality is existence.

Reality is that which is? No that is the truth, you can have false realities, like people who have hallusinations which think are real, like the film 'The beuatiful Mind'.

Sustained? Learn some physics.

What has physics got to do with this?

My claim that you need God isn't baseless, you need Him because you will go to hell unless you have Him.

ipse dixit, circular.

Circular, or true? The truth is circular. Because it is the truth.
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2009 12:43:40 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/21/2009 4:18:25 AM, GodSands wrote:
1. I hope so.
2. I hope so.
3. I wouldn't ever give up God, He is not just apart of my logical thinking in philosophy, but He is true to me in my life generally, day in, day out. As a Father.

Ok what's this you got up your sleve, come on tell me.

You didn't answer "Yes" to all three. However, I understand how hard it is for you to answer "yes" to the third question. So instead, I ask you this:

3. If I share with you my analysis, you can keep God in your life, but will you acknowledge that through logic and reason, your belief is irrational? Yes or No?

That is, assuming that you can understand what I say and are capable of pointing out flaws in what I say (which I highly doubt you are).

If logic and reason say that God doesn't exist, it does not necessarily mean that God does not exist. It just means that the belief is irrational.

If you answer no, then there is no need for me to tell you.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2009 1:19:44 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
: At 11/21/2009 12:43:40 PM, Kleptin wrote:
At 11/21/2009 4:18:25 AM, GodSands wrote:
1. I hope so.
2. I hope so.
3. I wouldn't ever give up God, He is not just apart of my logical thinking in philosophy, but He is true to me in my life generally, day in, day out. As a Father.

Ok what's this you got up your sleve, come on tell me.

You didn't answer "Yes" to all three. However, I understand how hard it is for you to answer "yes" to the third question. So instead, I ask you this:

3. If I share with you my analysis, you can keep God in your life, but will you acknowledge that through logic and reason, your belief is irrational? Yes or No?

That is, assuming that you can understand what I say and are capable of pointing out flaws in what I say (which I highly doubt you are).

If logic and reason say that God doesn't exist, it does not necessarily mean that God does not exist. It just means that the belief is irrational.

If you answer no, then there is no need for me to tell you.


Just get on with this. Tell me or do not. I am not really too fussed.
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2009 1:47:28 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/21/2009 1:19:44 PM, GodSands wrote:
Just get on with this. Tell me or do not. I am not really too fussed.

I don't perform music for the deaf or draw paintings for the blind.

Why should I explain my logic to you?
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2009 3:36:19 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/21/2009 9:01:19 AM, GodSands wrote:

God is necessary, after you have God, then we can start talking about sufficient things. You are trying to cook an egg without heat here.

You are not addressing the raised point, that your belief statement is the necessary basis for your epistemological claims. Saying God exists just reiterates your stance, not support it.

Connecting to solipsism here, where Descartes idea of the only thing that really exist is your mind and everything else is just a hallusination made up of your mind. In your own mind rain falls from the clouds, and it your own mind others notice rain coming from clouds like you do. Without God this is a very, if impossible problem for you to over come. So yes you have knowledge that rain falls from clouds, but only empirical knowledge, not reasonable knowledge. In other words universal knowledge.

You make no sense. Either rain comes from clouds is true. Or rain comes from clouds is false. If it is true then it is knowledge. There is not some absurd Kantian esque noumenal realm of knowledge in addition to 'reality.'

I see you already know about solipsism.

Yes.

I was not talking of a demon as such, but you know when young children say, "What's that made of?" and, "Where did that come from?" Until you have no answer.

Until I have no answer what? My position is that I have an answers to certain aspects relating to reality. A child by nature, has fewer concepts, less developed brain for processing information - that still doesn't mean they can't grasp, nor know certain things if explained adequately - depends what age we are talking about.

That is where you will find your beliefs, in your case they are floating of nothing.

Um nope. My beliefs are grounded in rationalisation.

What do you think universal knowledge is?

Knowledge of that which is.

The whole point to truth is that because we cannot sense it, we must, must believe in it.

Sense what God? In which case all you assert is my belief 'God exists' is a baseless claim.

Along with that you use logic to discover what truth is, by narrowing it down you will find God.

Your method of reasoning =/= using logic.

You may finally come to the conclusion that God is the only answer in 5, 10, 15 years, or when you die, but the answer is God.

You forgot the final option, not at all. I know you like to believe that atheists are whimpering sad messes at deaths door, you have stated as such before. That does not accurately reflect a universal claim in the least, that all atheists will recant when faced with death.

Please find me an answer which matches up to God, if not, God is the answer. (Psalm 14:1).

Logic, empirics, rationality.

No, God exists, I believe in God, therefore I know rain SHOULD (not could or does) come from clouds.

Still does not follow; what is the basis for anything related to raining from 'God exists'?

But I am using my sensers. God created them.

Thats the whole point, God gave us our 5 senses, so that we can enjoy the things He has created.

Whereas my basis of reality is God and not my senses

You contradict your self.

Rain is water which comes from clouds. And this goes for your numbers 3 and 4 questions. God created us with 5 senses, and with those senses we can logically find out where our universe came from, without going down the pointless road of goose chase (Big Bang). That leads nowhere and you will learn one day that you might as well have gone straight to God

An absurd appeal to the future. If you once showed adequate understanding of chemistry, biology or physics your claim may have basic merit. As it stands it's just the stamping foot of a petulant child who recognises a large portion of the world exists that it can't access.

You have seen things like I have, smelt things like I have, heard things like me, tastes, and touched things like I have, so I can accout for you.

No. You claimed my knowledge was a societal construct relativistic in nature - you knowing what rain is does not in the least qualify you as adequately basing that claim in reality.

Yes in short, yes that is why you exist.

No that is your belief claim.

Frankly because your ability to understand the argument I doubt at - it is based off certain axioms and their corollaries.

Don't even understand this, explain?

You just made my point. We can't discuss it if you don't have the adequate tools necessary to process it. That includes a set of concepts, including in part, language and definitions which you lack at present.

Reality is that which is? No that is the truth, you can have false realities, like people who have hallusinations which think are real, like the film 'The beuatiful Mind'.

Hallucinations are false BY DEFINITION, clearly not existent. Hallucinations occur is true, is reality; hallucinations that occur being true is not. Reality is existence, existence is that which is.

Sustained? Learn some physics.

What has physics got to do with this?

See prior points about 1. Us discussing something where you don't have the necessary equipment. 2. You clear lack of knowledge of the sciences.

Stating the universe requires sustenance is a claim on physics.


My claim that you need God isn't baseless, you need Him because you will go to hell unless you have Him.

ipse dixit, circular.

Circular, or true? The truth is circular. Because it is the truth.

Is it a tree, or is it A TREE!!!!!!!!? It's a tree because it is a tree therefore it is a tree, so you can see it's a tree because the truth is that it is a tree, thus proving it is a tree, since the truth is that it is a tree it is indeed a tree.

That is the absurdity of a circular argument, truth is not circular, stop being silly - and you say you use logic.