(April 3, 2018 at 7:30 am)MysticKnight Wrote: It's a stance that not only says it's without belief of God.

It's a stance that ultimately is neutral to what is the true nature of a human (for example, whether it's spiritual or not).

For example, weak Atheists would say they don't know if they have a real soul in the sense religious believe.

It's ok to not know. But What I don't understand, is the assumption no human can know they are soul, simply because you don't.

It's very rational in fact to say if we are soul, it would be one of the more apparent things to realize.

My conclusion in weak Atheism, is they are trying to give intelligence and knowledge to a stance of ignorance.

I don't know is fine. But to make it the staying place.  


None of us in our lives I think weren't Atheists in the weak sense. We all wondered at some point in our lives, if God truly exists or not, and were inclined one way or another, but didn't really believe one way or another.

I know as a child, I questioned God, I even did it explicitly to my parents, where I asked questions, and I understood evolution before I even heard of it. It was a theory I understood and assumed possible, before even hearing it (I was 6 years old when I asked "why does the world have to be created, if God can exist always, why not the universe?").

But I know then there could be so many reasons that I don't know which is why I brought up to my parents who didn't have a good answer.

I even realized then, they weren't to guide me regarding this, if I were to know the truth regarding it.

6 years old. Some people never grow up though

You are wrong.  Just not absolutely wrong.  There are Buddhists who absolutely believe in the soul, and afterlife  but not in god.  And there are plain old non religious atheists who believe in souls, the afterlife, and possibly bigfoot. Atheists who are atheists due to skepticism are unlikely to believe in any of those things.  Most of the atheists here are skeptical atheists.   

Whether skeptical  atheists want souls, an afterlife and/or or a god of some to exist is an entirely different matter.  There have been more than one new atheist here  bemoaning the lack of those things.  Realizing that what you want is probably nonexistent hurts.

Personally, I don't believe in souls or an afterlife of any kind.  Whether I'd want to live for eternity is a different question.  The unreflective answer if yes of course I'd like to live forever.  But forever and a lot longer are very different.  Most things become hell if repeated indefinitely.  Getting eternal life might be a kind of hell regardless of how nicely it begins.  I'd like a little more detail first before I sign up for eternity.  Forever with the ability quit at any time would be ideal.

Hell, good luck Jenny.

(April 3, 2018 at 11:41 am)MysticKnight Wrote:

(April 3, 2018 at 11:37 am)FatAndFaithless Wrote: Again, you're claiming that we know the truth.  You're claiming to know what everyone else believes and knows.

I'm saying it has become apparent. You guys aren't willing to reflect or listen, because you perceive it, and so you avoid the reflection and hearing necessary to believe. You either get into the discussion to mock it around and avoid really from me presenting the case while you hear it or then after you are done, the discussion, call it all babble.
You perceive but don't perceive, listen but don't listen, know but don't know.
You choose ignorance instead of the leap of faith necessary which is just holding to the truth with the heart and embracing it with full submission over irrational doubt and it's loud unclean whispers.

No. It’s because nothing you say makes any fucking sense, MK. You can’t just throw a bunch of nice sounding words together like love, and perception, and value, and expect people to have a revelation. Those words, in the order you often use them in, don’t mean anything.  You aren’t saying anything.

“The light of the truth of the love at the face of the value of Kings is truest when the soul sees the mind of the ultimate guidance, and knows its true meaning”,

is an incoherent sentence that I smashed together just now with out thinking about it.  It’s senseless rambling.  It should sound like rambling to you, and it’s why the shit you say sounds like rambling to us.  If you have some type of intelligible idea behind that crap, you’re doing a piss poor job of communicating it.  That is not our fault.

(April 3, 2018 at 1:05 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote:

(April 3, 2018 at 11:41 am)MysticKnight Wrote: I'm saying it has become apparent. You guys aren't willing to reflect or listen, because you perceive it, and so you avoid the reflection and hearing necessary to believe. You either get into the discussion to mock it around and avoid really from me presenting the case while you hear it or then after you are done, the discussion, call it all babble.
You perceive but don't perceive, listen but don't listen, know but don't know.
You choose ignorance instead of the leap of faith necessary which is just holding to the truth with the heart and embracing it with full submission over irrational doubt and it's loud unclean whispers.

No. It’s because nothing you say makes any fucking sense, MK. You can’t just throw a bunch of nice sounding words together like love, and perception, and value, and expect people to have a revelation.  lol Those words, in the order you often use them in, don’t mean anything.  You aren’t saying anything.

‘The light of the truth of the love at the face of the value of Kings is truest when the soul sees the mind of the ultimate guidance, and knows its true meaning”, is an incoherent sentence that I smashed together just now with out thinking about it.  It’s senseless rambling.  It should sound like rambling to you, and it’s why the shit you say sounds like rambling to us.  If you have some type of intelligible idea behind that crap, you’re doing a piss poor job of communicating it.  That is not our fault.

You are right. I will re-asses dialogue. I'm going to take philosophy classes for most the rest of my electives to be able to do this.

It's funny how you say those words have no meaning, but to me, it's only the coherent way for goodness to be true.

I guess facts are not enough to assess, it's all about what we are perceiving. 

I have to able to communicate better.

I will leave forums for now, gain skills, and come back when I can articulate better.

MK is on a roll today; I miss when he used to be somewhat lucid.

Proof is for alcohol and mathematics.

You are having a problem with evidence and reason; then getting pissy when you are called on it.

Well done on turning into the Muslim Deepak and completely misrepresenting disbelief.

(April 3, 2018 at 1:08 pm)MysticKnight Wrote:

(April 3, 2018 at 1:05 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: No. It’s because nothing you say makes any fucking sense, MK. You can’t just throw a bunch of nice sounding words together like love, and perception, and value, and expect people to have a revelation.  lol Those words, in the order you often use them in, don’t mean anything.  You aren’t saying anything.

‘The light of the truth of the love at the face of the value of Kings is truest when the soul sees the mind of the ultimate guidance, and knows its true meaning”, is an incoherent sentence that I smashed together just now with out thinking about it.  It’s senseless rambling.  It should sound like rambling to you, and it’s why the shit you say sounds like rambling to us.  If you have some type of intelligible idea behind that crap, you’re doing a piss poor job of communicating it.  That is not our fault.

You are right. I will re-asses dialogue. I'm going to take philosophy classes for most the rest of my electives to be able to do this.

It's funny how you say those words have no meaning, but to me, it's only the coherent way for goodness to be true.

I guess facts are not enough to assess, it's all about what we are perceiving. 

I have to able to communicate better.

I will leave forums for now, gain skills, and come back when I can articulate better.

Love, truth, goodness, perception...those words represent concepts, not facts.  Word definitions are big part of your communication problem, IMO. You can’t demonstrate the existence of a thing with concepts and ideas.  You can try at a formal logical argument for that thing, but your premises must be sound, and you can’t use concepts (love, truth, light, ect) to demonstrate the soundness of your premises.  You need facts and reason.  If I were you, I’d go back to the drawing board and start thinking about how you can change up the language you use to communicate with us.

(April 3, 2018 at 1:16 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote:  If I were you, I’d go back to the drawing board and start thinking about how you can change up the language you use to communicate with us.

Exactly what I intend to do. I'm going to learn philosophical terms already used in this way. I am going to define words elaborately before I use them and define them in a way we agree upon them before moving on. 

Then prove it from there. I know the truth, I just have to articulate it better.

Words don't have meanings, they have usages. I agree it is useful when the usage is commonly understood.

Religious texts have interpretations; these are far more varied and have proven to be dangerous for those obsessed with a single collection of book or words.

And why did God use language for his message, when it is subject to dying out and metamorphosis; not a consistent pathway to truth for the all-knowing. What a fuck-wit.

@Mystic
Every one of your interactions on these boards could help you learn this.  You just have to let it happen, lol.

(April 3, 2018 at 1:18 pm)MysticKnight Wrote:

(April 3, 2018 at 1:16 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote:  If I were you, I’d go back to the drawing board and start thinking about how you can change up the language you use to communicate with us.

Exactly what I intend to do. I'm going to learn philosophical terms already used in this way. I am going to define words elaborately before I use them and define them in a way we agree upon them before moving on. 

Then prove it from there. I know the truth, I just have to articulate it better.

Godspeed, friend.