(October 20, 2015 at 4:22 am)I_am_not_mafia Wrote: If an action is not performed in life and without faith but is inspired by God then that action by necessity is not an action. It is the illusion of an action. It is nothing more than a concept albeit one with negative utility. But if you have a life and do not perform actions then how can you have faith in God? We have two completely contradictory cases here which means that the two cases are simultaneously mutually exclusive yet complementary. The level of faith that you have is indirectly inversely proportional to your position in action-space that you inhabit cross linked by your belief in God's greatness. Which means that if you in any way perform any actions whatsoever then your belief in God must be an illusion. Therefore the more you try to prove your faith the less chance there is that God exists.

I largely agree, but I have to comment on some details which I think you got completely wrong here. Two mutually exclusive cases are complementary in action-space precisely because they, on a meta-level, are linked by God's greatness. Faith in this way helps transgress the boundary of negation and establishes the existence of God on a semantic level as an constructionist author-fiction relationship.

The salad dressing is strong in this one! hehe

(October 20, 2015 at 5:06 am)Alex K Wrote: I largely agree, but I have to comment on some details which I think you got completely wrong here. Two mutually exclusive cases are complementary in action-space precisely because they, on a meta-level, are linked by God's greatness. Faith in this way helps transgress the boundary of negation and establishes the existence of God on a semantic level as an constructionist author-fiction relationship.

Sorry yes you're entirely right. I don't know why that didn't occur to me. It's so obvious when you think about it.

Thanks for translating and responding

I don't speak saladise. Maybe I should learn it.

(October 20, 2015 at 6:49 am)robvalue Wrote: I don't speak saladise. Maybe I should learn it.

I find it easier and more fun to throw down a Demotivational.

(October 20, 2015 at 6:49 am)robvalue Wrote: Thanks for translating and responding

I don't speak saladise. Maybe I should learn it.

The proof is in the salad, as they say...

Ripping labels from mattresses - check
Roasted babies on weekends - check
No morality whatsoever - check

Yep I am certifiably NOT a theist.

(October 20, 2015 at 8:31 am)Aoi Magi Wrote: Yep I am certifiably NOT a theist.

Awesome. I wanted to play...

So the OP believes that we believe, that we do not believe in pretending to believe things that we know are false, whilst actually pretending to believe in pretending to believe in things that we know are false... and on this basis does not want us to donate to charity or have any positive impact on the world, whilst his own beliefs dictate that he wants the world to be destroyed?
And he wants proof of this?
I can't believe I wasted the time figuring out what the OP actually wrote...

(October 20, 2015 at 9:11 am)Mr Greene Wrote: So the OP believes that we believe, that we do not believe in pretending to believe things that we know are false, whilst actually pretending to believe in pretending to believe in things that we know are false... and on this basis does not want us to donate to charity or have any positive impact on the world, whilst his own beliefs dictate that he wants the world to be destroyed?
And he wants proof of this?
I can't believe I wasted the time figuring out what the OP actually wrote...

The OP is so self-absorbed I'm kinda surprised he hasn't created his own black hole.