(October 11, 2011 at 12:25 pm)thesummerqueen Wrote: bahahahahaha

FYI, people, lastpoet's been lying to us. He says he's from Portugal, but when you hear his accent on hang out you'd swear he was Russian.

Its not THAT! I needed beer to loosen up my tongue

(October 11, 2011 at 12:29 pm)Jaysyn Wrote:

(October 11, 2011 at 12:07 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: The theist will defend the rationalism of their concept, as it is rationally realised. The atheist cannot defend any concept because his concept isn't rationalised: it's formed from a lack of understanding of something.

Now prove that assertion.

It proves itself (given a little leeway for my inarticulacy )

(October 11, 2011 at 10:42 am)sonofodin Wrote: So you're saying that you can say you lack a belief in something ,even if it has multiple definitions, without specifying which definition you are referring to?

Alright, let's try an experiment.

I'll make a new word: Gooblebloc

These are its definitions:

1.A rare type of cheese
2.a flying pink elephant
3.plastic
4.air

Okay, it's rational to claim that I lack a belief in Gobblebloc because I don't need to specify what I'm referring to!

LMFAO

Are you saying that if i choose to call my penis god then I have to stop believing in my penis?

I dont think thats what you mean at all!

I think you know very well that god, although it has many different interpretations, has some pretty defining qualities at its heart.

It are these things that we reject.

The idea of any 'god' is antiquitated and it is a source of eternal shame that modern humans still cling to the out moded and useless concept in all its manifaestations.

Quote:The atheist cannot defend any concept because his concept isn't rationalised

And what is my 'concept'?

Surely atheism is a lack of a concept?

(October 11, 2011 at 12:07 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: The theist will defend the rationalism of their concept, as it is rationally realised.

Lay off the sauce fr0d0

fr0d0 Wrote:The atheist cannot defend any concept because his concept isn't rationalised: it's formed from a lack of understanding of something.

Are you making the 'atheists don't understand Yaweh' argument? Because theists do the rationalizing of the god concept allowing us to not believe in them does not mean we don't understand it.

Of course you don't understand it FNM. There is nothing more obvious.

Further more, from the OP, your view is based upon something you don't understand: explicitly.

(October 11, 2011 at 1:50 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: Of course you don't understand it FNM. There is nothing more obvious.

Further more, from the OP, your view is based upon something you don't understand: explicitly.

Well don't just assert it, prove it.

Since when is rejecting theism consider as irrational as accepting theism.

Is believing that Thor is actually the god of thunder rational? Because belief in Thor is very much a theistic position.

Is rejecting the notion that Thor is a god of thunder an irrational proposition?

(October 11, 2011 at 1:34 pm)5thHorseman Wrote: Surely atheism is a lack of a concept?

No, it is a present concept about what is acceptable as temporary stand in for the truth while one furthers the process of discovery. Theistic assumptions as they are fall risibly far short of qualifying.