…the noyau, an animal society held together by mutual animosity rather than co-operation
Robert Ardrey, The Territorial Imperative.
The Skeptical Zone
"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible that you may be mistaken."
…the noyau, an animal society held together by mutual animosity rather than co-operation
Robert Ardrey, The Territorial Imperative.
Definitions are not claims they are well…….. definitions.
If you want to take the position that definitions are not definitional. I would only ask you to support that extraordinary claim by telling my how you know
peace
Sorry
If that is true I apologize
I did not see it until this morning when I checked this thread while looking for Omagain and found a plethora of comments directed to me or about me .
Do you know what is going on with Omagain?
He seems to have disappeared with out a trace along with the thread I was using to communicate with him.
The last I heard he was making progress on my simple little gizmo and we would soon be able to do some actual ID hypothesis testing.
peace
Nope, no idea.
I know the answer to both of these, but I can’t be sure it won’t change tomorrow.
fifthmonarchyman,
Nothing. Now you’ve been told. Again.
Simple logic and reason. You have provided no support for your claim that a god or gods exist. That means that there is no reason, literally no reason, to take your claim seriously. Without support it is, by definition, vacuous.
The thing is, you know this. You’re being deliberately obtuse and dishonest in your interactions about this topic.
fifthmonarchyman,
There’s that dishonest attempt to avoid your burden of proof again.
You are the one claiming that a god exists and is necessary for knowledge. It is your responsibility to support those claims. Cubist put it nicely and succinctly:
If you’re not willing or able to support your claims there is quite literally no reason (because you’ve given no reason) to take them seriously.
How do you given your worldview know that logic and reason are valid? Be specific please.
How can you possibly know that logic and reason are valid with out using logic and reason?
What I know is that God exists and is the source of all knowledge. What I don’t know is how you can know anything at all given your worldview.
You have offered absolutely no basis for your position yet you continue to make claims as if you had.
peace
fifthmonarchyman,
I am. I lack belief in a god or gods. If someone were to present some objective, empirical evidence for the existence of such entities, I would change my mind. Got any?
No. Take off your religious blinders for a moment and read carefully. Until you provide support for your claim that a god or gods exist there is no reason to take your claim seriously. See that “no reason” part? That means you have provided no reason to consider your claim might have any merit whatsoever. The burden of proof is yours.
fifthmonarchyman,
You’re not providing definitions, you are making the claim that a god or gods exist. You have the burden of proof to support that claim. So far you’ve provided none.
So now you go back to the conclusion you just denied making.
How exactly do you know this? Please be specific?
What I want to know is how you went about determining that “support” qualifies as a valid reason to take claims seriously?
Exactly what “supporting” evidence did you use when you made that determination?
peace
fifthmonarchyman,
They work. Unlike your unsupported religious beliefs.
Do you think your behavior reflects well on your religious beliefs? Do you think people read what you write and think “Gee, I should give fifthmonarchyman’s religion a closer look — he’s such a honest, upright guy.”?
You’ve never once supported your claims with evidence or argument. You constantly squirm to avoid putting your beliefs at the slightest risk of disconfirmation. If your god existed, it would have bitch slapped you for bringing shame upon it by now.
fifthmonarchyman,
Already answered repeatedly. Your repetition of these kinds of questions merely reinforces the evidence of your dishonesty and lack of good faith in these discussions.
When you’re in your church over this holiday, think on this: “Better is a poor person who walks in his integrity than one who is crooked in speech and is a fool.”
You are not showing integrity in your interactions here.
No Ive repeatedly provided a working definition of God here it is again.
Remember it’s a definition not a claim
quote:
The Lord our God is but one God, whose subsistence is in Himself; whose essence cannot be comprehended by any but himself, who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light, which no man can approach unto; who is in Himself most holy, every way infinite, in greatness, wisdom, power, love, merciful and gracious, long-suffering, and abundant in goodness and truth; who giveth being, moving, and preservation to all creatures.
In this divine and infinite Being there is the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; each having the whole divine Essence, yet the Essence undivided; all infinite without any beginning, therefore but one God; who is not to be divided in nature, and being, but distinguished by several peculiar relative properties.
end quote:
If I decide to make claims about this God you will be the first to know.
peace
No you have not answered the question. You have only moved the question one step and tried to change the subject
Our conversations go something like this
FMM——How do you know stuff?
Patrick—-logic
FMM—— How do you know that your logic is valid?
Patrick—–Crickets
Patrick ——You are a poopy head
FMM—– How do you know stuff?
Patrick—–Evidence
Fmm—–How do you know that evidence is the way to know stuff?
Patrick—-Crickets
Patrick —-There is no evidence that God exists
FMM—-Geeze
The same pattern is repeated over and over and over again.
peace
fifthmonarchyman,
You’re trying to call it something else, but you are claiming that a god exists.
fifthmonarchyman,
Yes, I have, but you’ve clipped context and tried to change the subject. Does your concept of a god encourage that kind of dishonest behavior?
Here’s the full context, that anyone can read just above in this thread:
Here’s the answer from upthread:
Stop being dishonest and support your claim. It’s what your god would want if it existed.
To claim that God exists would be silly. Everyone knows God exists. It’s not a question that is open for debate
peace
How do you know this??????
How can you possibly know this given your worldview ?????
peace
The Happy Crickets Sing White Christmas
fifthmonarchyman,
I’ve seen at least four people on this site, including me, explain to you that this is incorrect. It is also rude.
I lack any belief in a god or gods. I have never seen any evidence for such a thing. You have certainly provided none.
You can wiggle and squirm all you like but the fact remains that you are claiming that a god exists and you are utterly failing to support that claim. Continuing to say that you aren’t making a claim is an out and out lie.
Patrick——Only things that supported by reasons are should be taken seriously
FMM———How do you know this?
Patrick——- Crickets
Same pattern different day
peace
Patrick———-I don’t know God exists.
FMM——–How do you know that you don’t know God exists? Given your worldview how could you possibly know this?
Patrick —–Crickets
peace
fifthmonarchyman,
Simple. Read my words without the blinders from your childhood indoctrination on.
You claim that a god exists.
You have provided no objective, empirical evidence for this claim.
You have provided no rational argument to support this claim.
Therefore your claim is unsupported. You have provided no support. It is an objective fact based on your comments here. Anyone can confirm it.
So, without support there is no reason to take your claim seriously. Another way of putting it is that there is no reason to consider it descriptive of reality. “No reason” because you have provided no reason.
This isn’t rocket science. Until you choose to support your claim, and I’m not holding my breath, it is without merit.
How do you know that I must provide a reason for you to have a reason?
How do you know that there is no reason if I have not provide one?
How do you know that support is necessary for there to be a reason?
come on man use your head.
Read my words with out the unsupported assumptions about reality that you steal from my worldview.
peace
How do you know this??? How can you possibly know this??
geeze
Are you really this dense???
peace
fifthmonarchyman,
It’s the only appropriate response to dishonest willful ignorance.
You’re trying to spin your unsupported assertions as somehow equal to evidenced statements about reality. You’re attempting to construct an impregnable rhetorical loop to avoid having to look at the utter lack of support for any of your claims.
If you just came out and said “I believe in god despite the lack of any supporting evidence.” that would at least be honest. What you’re doing isn’t.
fifthmonarchyman,
Re-read what I wrote.
Nope, and I don’t think you are either. I think you’re grossly dishonest.
Yet another unsupported claim.
How do you know it is the only appropriate response?
How do you know that I’m expressing dishonest willful ignorance?
How can you possibly know this?
How can you possibly know anything at all given your worldview?
peace
This tendency of yours to see intellectual challenges to your worldview as evidence of moral failing explains a lot about what goes on here.
As does your apparent inability to apply the same standard to yourself that you demand of others.
peace
fifthmonarchyman,
This is yet another example of you attempting to hide behind the concept of “worldview” when the real issue is your failure to support your claims. You are not engaging honestly in the discussion. That’s a simple fact.
I’m willing to support any claims I make with evidence and reasoned argument. You are not.
fifthmonarchyman,
I am basing that view on your behavior here thus far, as exhaustively discussed.
Given that it’s the solstice season, traditionally a time of good will and new beginnings, I would be wiling to consider the alternative that you have simply been so corrupted by those who indoctrinated you in your faith that you’re incapable of understanding how to engage in rational discourse. Do thank them for that when you see them next.
OK start with this one
please with evidence and reasoned argument support you claim that
quote:
It’s the only appropriate response to dishonest willful ignorance.
end quote:
once you are done with that we can work our way back up this thread
thanks in advance
peace
I think I’m beginning to detect a pattern.
It’s a recursive algorithm!
fifthmonarchyman,
When the person one is interacting with is not engaging honestly and in good faith, responding to their bad faith questions leads down rhetorical rat holes and distracts from the dishonest behavior. You ask other people to support their claims but never support your own. Hence the appropriate response is to ignore your attempts at diverting attention from your execrable behavior.
Now, I’ve answered about enough of your questions and allowed you to drag this out long enough. It’s high time you either provide support for your claim that a god exists or admit that you cannot.
This is getting to sound more and more like a religious version of the Eliza bot.
Presuppositionalist? I’m a Pre-presuppositionlist. Everyone who knows that God exists knows that they once didn’t know this. Hence, God does not exist. It’s not a question that is open for debate.
Why?
Why is it appropriate to avoid rhetorical rat holes? How do you you know your behavior will lead to the avoidance of rhetorical rat holes?
How could you possibly know this given your world view?
no you have not you have yet to answer any of my questions is a way that is satisfactory or that you would accept if it came from me.
All you have done is move one step and try to change the subject.
Please provide actual support for your claim and then we can move to the next claim as we move backward in the thread.
IOW tell me how you know stuff
Thanks in advance
peace
Yeah it’s a pretty simple bot it stops when it encounters an actual basis for knowledge. Something equivalent to revelation
So far it it’s has not even come close when it comes to your worldview
peace
How could you possibly know that God does not exist given your worldview?
peace
I’m a pre-presuppositionalist. It’s not about knowing, it’s about adhering to my theology.
I’m glad to see your theology has room for Christmas!
🙂
Ok then carry on in your absurdity
peace
Quite.
Glen Davidson
Logic for nothing, get your reason for free!
Mung,
Indeed it does. And a Merry Christmas to all.
Merry Christmas all you east coast pukes!
Merry Christmas all you central time zone religious nutcases!
There are no atheists in the midwest.
Merry Christmas you Mountain Time Zone Doomsday Preppers!
Fire off a round or two for all of us.
Patrick ——–it’s the only appropriate response to dishonest willful ignorance.
FMM———–how do you know this ???
Patrick——— the appropriate response is to ignore your attempts at diverting attention from your execrable behavior and avoid the rhetorical rat holes
FMM——–how do you know it’s good to avoid rhetorical rat holes???
Patrick—-Crickets
same dance different day
The bot halts as soon it finds something solid but since you have nothing solid you repeatedly try and change the subject and shift the focus to something else.
so the bot questions on
sort of like the energizer bunny
or you could drop all the atheist propaganda and talk about something interesting
peace