I've been around this tree with Evie quite a lot of times VOID... that he can't muster up a grain of intelligence to apply to what we've said to each other is down to him. I'm doing him no favours thinking for him.. he has to start thinking for himself at some point. I'm not going to explain the difference to him yet again when he didn't fucking get it the last 50 times I took the trouble to tell him. There's stubborn then there's ignorance.

Back to you... have you worked it out yet?

(January 27, 2010 at 9:42 pm)KichigaiNeko Wrote:

(January 27, 2010 at 9:29 pm)theVOID Wrote: Is it fun being such a spineless little runt fr0d0?

Seems to me like you're too damn dishonest to even conceded the point, that's what people who have real intellectual honesty do when they are utterly unable to refute the arguments or explain their contradictions, they don't keep dodging the questions with idiotic, cowardly statements riddled with contradiction.

^^^^^^

It would be safe then to conclude (generally speaking) that people who are atheists (or lean in that direction) have come to that point in their lives that they will no longer accept intellectual dishonesty??

Intellectual dishonesty is a prerequisite to faith??

Works for me

Nobody should accept it.

(January 27, 2010 at 9:47 pm)theVOID Wrote:

(January 27, 2010 at 9:42 pm)KichigaiNeko Wrote:

(January 27, 2010 at 9:29 pm)theVOID Wrote: Is it fun being such a spineless little runt fr0d0?

Seems to me like you're too damn dishonest to even conceded the point, that's what people who have real intellectual honesty do when they are utterly unable to refute the arguments or explain their contradictions, they don't keep dodging the questions with idiotic, cowardly statements riddled with contradiction.

^^^^^^

It would be safe then to conclude (generally speaking) that people who are atheists (or lean in that direction) have come to that point in their lives that they will no longer accept intellectual dishonesty??

Intellectual dishonesty is a prerequisite to faith??

Works for me

Nobody should accept it.

Agreed but it seems to be accepted and expanded upon via religion. Human propensity to lie to one's self is reinforced via the religion model where the MORE persons you have the easier it is to hide from the facts and accuse somebody else "weren't me, must have been ...o ...god did it...it was the will of allah....Yahweh was angry...yadida, yadida"

(January 27, 2010 at 9:42 pm)KichigaiNeko Wrote: It would be safe then to conclude (generally speaking) that people who are atheists (or lean in that direction) have come to that point in their lives that they will no longer accept intellectual dishonesty??

Intellectual dishonesty is a prerequisite to faith??

Works for me

So you discriminate against faith and that makes you intellectually honest??

99% of Atheists claim the intellectualism of 1% of atheists.

(January 27, 2010 at 9:46 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: I've been around this tree with Evie quite a lot of times VOID... that he can't muster up a grain of intelligence to apply to what we've said to each other is down to him. I'm doing him no favours thinking for him.. he has to start thinking for himself at some point. I'm not going to explain the difference to him yet again when he didn't fucking get it the last 50 times I took the trouble to tell him. There's stubborn then there's ignorance.

Back to you... have you worked it out yet?

Answer my questions then.

1) Without evidence or logic supporting your claims, how do you rationalise your ideas in your own mind?

2) By what standard do you verify your beliefs? Is it experiential revelation/insight or just faith in a doctrine?

3) If it is personal insight / revelation then how do you rationalise your revelations as more true than contradictory insights from other people who used the same standard of verification?

4) If it is faith in a doctrine how do you know your faith is well placed? If you use no evidence or logic to verify your position then how can you be sure the doctrines of the Bible are in any way accurate in any way?

You're going into bullshit territory VOID. Answer your question why? You seem to want to change subject entirely.

1) false assumption
2) based on Q1 so void
3) ditto
4) ditto

Back to the actual question... how do you conclude that there should be evidence for God?

Evasion really is all you get from the religious. Give up now theVOID. He just wants to stay in his little puny sand box.

(January 27, 2010 at 9:59 pm)theVOID Wrote:

(January 27, 2010 at 9:46 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: I've been around this tree with Evie quite a lot of times VOID... that he can't muster up a grain of intelligence to apply to what we've said to each other is down to him. I'm doing him no favours thinking for him.. he has to start thinking for himself at some point. I'm not going to explain the difference to him yet again when he didn't fucking get it the last 50 times I took the trouble to tell him. There's stubborn then there's ignorance.

Back to you... have you worked it out yet?

Answer my questions then.

1) Without evidence or logic supporting your claims, how do you rationalise your ideas in your own mind?

2) By what standard do you verify your beliefs? Is it experiential revelation/insight or just faith in a doctrine?

3) If it is personal insight / revelation then how do you rationalise your revelations as more true than contradictory insights from other people who used the same standard of verification?

4) If it is faith in a doctrine how do you know your faith is well placed? If you use no evidence or logic to verify your position then how can you be sure the doctrines of the Bible are in any way accurate in any way?

(January 27, 2010 at 10:08 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: You're going into bullshit territory VOID. Answer your question why? You seem to want to change subject entirely.

1) false assumption
2) based on Q1 so void
3) ditto
4) ditto

Back to the actual question... how do you conclude that there should be evidence for God?

1) 'False assumption' is not an appropriate answer. The question was "Without evidence or logic supporting your claims, how[b] do you [b]rationalize your ideas in your own mind?"
2-4) Evasion. Define your beliefs.

It was an appropriate answer. Given a statement I don't agree with, how do i answer one way or another? I can't. VOID is avoiding the question at hand.

Intellectual honesty ...hmm.

What fr0d0 has to say.

---

Post: #13