(September 24, 2010 at 1:02 pm)theVOID Wrote: If someone comes here with a sincere argument for God i'm not just going to dismiss them for such ascenine reasons.

I am back!!! Excuse me but if the VOID would like to engage me again in a debate I would be more than happy to acomadate him. If not I will take a differant sparring partner.

I think I am much more compatent debater now!

Competent, creationism, somehow I doubt this greatly.

Sensibility lies in doubting here, not certainty, but with doubt, you tend to admit the possibility of learning something without needing insanity to come to a conclusion.

Quote:Er...what's an "Agnostic Theist?"

Min; as theism is is about belief, and agnosticism is about knowledge,I think an agnostic theist is one who believes in a god of some kind but believes he/it is unknowable.An intellectually sneaky form of theism,in my opinion. It has the whiff of Pascal's wager about it.

So, in laymans terms, smells like bullshit?

While we're at it, what is Leondias? Are we talking Ellhenistic ihstory here?

Oh dear, ANOTHER Catholic apologist.

HERE I STAND:


I've been a recovering Catholic for over 40 years. I gave up arguing with apologists about 25 years ago.I do not conflate winning argument with being right.(necessarily) Today I state my position and wait for a reply:

I reject Catholic thinkers such as Augustine and Aquinas in that I reject the notion that truth can be derived from reason alone; I demand evidence.

I do not believe in god(s),the soul,the afterlife, angels,demons,mountain trolls,dragons or fairies at the bottom of my garden,due to lack of credible evidence.

If you believe in any or all of those things,wonderful,I'm happy for you! Would you like me to share your beliefs? No problem at all;simply show me your evidence in support of your claims. IF you are unable to do so,kindly stop wasting my time and bugger off,there's a good chap.

That the existence of god(s) has so far in recorded history been both unproved and unfalsifiable is not my problem. It simply means I'm unable to believe.

Quote:Thought for today Theology;The effort to explain the unknowable in terms of the not worth knowing (H L Mencken)

(September 17, 2011 at 8:17 pm)padraic Wrote: Oh dear, ANOTHER Catholic apologist.

HERE I STAND:


I've been a recovering Catholic for over 40 years. I gave up arguing with apologists about 25 years ago.I do not conflate winning argument with being right.(necessarily) Today I state my position and wait for a reply:

I reject Catholic thinkers such as Augustine and Aquinas in that I reject the notion that truth can be derived from reason alone; I demand evidence.

I do not believe in god(s),the soul,the afterlife, angels,demons,mountain trolls,dragons or fairies at the bottom of my garden,due to lack of credible evidence.

If you believe in any or all of those things,wonderful,I'm happy for you! Would you like me to share your beliefs? No problem at all;simply show me your evidence in support of your claims. IF you are unable to do so,kindly stop wasting my time and bugger off,there's a good chap.

That the existence of god(s) has so far in recorded history been both unproved and unfalsifiable is not my problem. It simply means I'm unable to believe.

Ah, you are realist and a coherentist my friend. I happen to be a intrumentalist and a foundationalist. But arguing about that will get us nowhere. Anyway you wanted evidence, yes? What is evidence? Evidence is not proof. Evidence is something that gives a sign of the existence or truth of something. So you cannot ask me for evidence without me going to reasoning or trying to show that in philosophical way your reasoning is flawed. You see evidence can be seen(and is) as reasoning + material objects but the only material evidence I have is not even material at all since its threw a computer. Neither scientific laws or theories nor God are considered material. Therefore even if you saw God and everyone knew he was real because he appeared to all of us right at this moment would he be material. I would consider that very much evidence but to you in this case you would by your own criteria reject it.
I would be curious what a potential brother in Christ is doing so far from the light he doesn't let the mere possiblity of a Creator pop it too its head. He even says were he to be beaten(in a debate) he would deny that even though he was not able to reason that he probley was wrong. Unless you can make a standing arguement my friend then your reasoning for not believing in God is flawed.
I would also ask you really think philosophically about what is real? You are so quick to assume the world around us is completely real and exists for certain. Not to say I believe this but the arguements for solipism and subjectivism are somewhat compelling. But Empiricism may be alittle more my attitude.

---

(September 17, 2011 at 7:34 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Competent, creationism, somehow I doubt this greatly.

Hmm, sound a bit close minded.

---

I also happen to wonder WHY you reject Saint Augustine and Aquinas. You brought no rebuttal. I rebuke the materialistic view if you wish but still your opening statement seems to constitute a unwillingness to believe no matter how wrong you are!

(September 11, 2010 at 10:28 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

(September 11, 2010 at 9:02 pm)Liu Bei mixed with Leondias Wrote: I belive that the greek gods exist but I could be wrong(Agnostic)

Zeus was, at the least, pretty cool.

Have you seen his car? Fucking amazing :p

(September 17, 2011 at 8:15 pm)Epimethean Wrote: While we're at it, what is Leondias? Are we talking Ellhenistic ihstory here?

Leondias
[youtube]OpiqlA-QUUQ[/youtube]

Perhaps the kid meant

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonidas_I

(Spell check is my friend)

Liu Bei

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liu_Bei

All statements to the fact... "big ego...small dick" meh.