the more and more we try not to be a religion. we are becoming one.

gnostic atheists ... give me a fukin break. The new phrahse

"I have been given intimate knowledge about "nothing". yep that sound like a group I would follow

Look...another sasquatch!

(June 13, 2014 at 8:05 am)archangle Wrote: the more and more we try not to be a religion. we are becoming one.

"We?"

Assimilation is inevitable.

(June 12, 2014 at 8:53 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: Not so. Firstly, faith is not simply belief; faith is belief in the absence of evidence, or in the face of contravening evidence. I have no faith. I'm sure I won't float away from the ground not because I have faith in gravity, but because long years of experience lead me to know that gravity sucks.

I'll assume that by "sucks" you mean "pulls stuff in the direction of other stuff".
Anyway, as I explain later on, when you set your standards for everything as high as you do for the existence of gods, you must have faith in everything, including gravity.

(June 12, 2014 at 8:53 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: As for "if they can be proven false", the fact is that it is still knowledge in the sense of my mental outlook until that point, in the same manner that Newtonian physics was thought to be completely explanatory until it was found to suffer distortions when exposed to extreme conditions. It was, and is, still knowledge, as are Einsteinian physics, even though our knowledge of Newton's physics was changed by Einstein's insights.

Like I said, you knew the concepts (maybe), but not the reality. The thing is that you believe those concepts to reflect the reality of things. Newtonian physics is wrong, or, at best, incomplete. So is Einstein's. Everything in science is incomplete, because we don't have absolute knowledge.

(June 12, 2014 at 8:53 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: ... which is exactly why I wrote that I regard existence as axiomatic, meaning that we start with the assumption that we exist, but are willing to overthrow that axiom if we can find evidence which disproves it. Of course, if I don't exist, I can't really think about it, now can I?

In other words, you have faith in existence, since you can't prove it. Thanks for playing.

(June 12, 2014 at 8:53 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: No, the logical conclusion of my standard of proof for deities is that knowledge is tentative. Anything else is imputing onto me a belief I don't hold.

Then your definition of "knowledge" must be as loose as a christian's definition of "love".

(June 12, 2014 at 8:53 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: That depends on the object of proof or disproof. If we're trying to disprove the existence of the dog on your lap, then sure, you have a point.

However, when we're discussing concepts as grand as deities --and their reputed powers of omnipresence etc -- then yes, being able to examine the entire Universe is needed for disproof in the pure sense of that word.

So you admit you have double standards for evidence. Again, thanks for playing.

(June 12, 2014 at 8:53 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: This is a false dichotomy, for the reasoning I've given above. I hold to neither view you're trying to impute upon me, and that renders your argument another swat at a strawman.

The point is not to create a strawman. The point is to show you that double standards of evidence are stupid to have.

(June 12, 2014 at 8:53 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: I think knowkedge and epistemology are much more subtly nuanced issues than you do, it seems. I'm not really interested in changing your mind, though.

In that case, consider this discussion to be over.

(June 13, 2014 at 10:17 am)One Above All Wrote: In other words, you have faith in existence, since you can't prove it. Thanks for playing.

Wait, you mean to tell me that you don't understand the difference between a belief held in faith, and an axiomatic principle?

(June 13, 2014 at 10:17 am)One Above All Wrote: In that case, consider this discussion to be over.

Indeed ... not that it ever really got off the ground. You haven't read what I've written; you've read what you've filtered.

(June 13, 2014 at 9:16 am)Rhythm Wrote: Assimilation is inevitable.

It's actually futile.

Why do you resist? We only wish to raise the quality of life for all species.



(if anyone else enjoys randomly dropping borg quotes..I have a game you need to download..lol, pm me)

(June 10, 2014 at 4:45 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: It must be torture to be a Christian. I couldn't stand it.

If I really believed Hell was a real place and that the vast majority of people were destined for eternal torture, the sadistic nature of which would make the Nazis cringe in moral disgust, it would drive me crazy. I couldn't stand the thought of no one heeding my warnings or that even one person I spoke with couldn't be saved. It would be like watching as all of us obliviously walk off the edge of a cliff into an active volcano, only there wouldn't be the release of death to end our torments in the lake of fire below.

Then again, I'd have trouble worshiping a god who would do that.

But, while the christers are all firmly convinces that almost everyone is going to hell, they are just as firmly convinced that all their loved ones are going to heaven. Even if it means somehow getting the "problem" loved ones some form of magical sky-daddy exemption.

Gotta say, even the most christiany of these family members appears to be asleep at the wheel to me, were hell a reality. Oughta be bible bible bible, morning noon and night, signing about the bible and only the bible, constantly godding absolutely everything up. I'd quit my job...build my miscreant family member their own damned church....I'd go to any length to avoid my family going to hell, fuck this veil of tears - as it'll soon be lifted..........

...but no...all we see are very sincerely worded appeals, and passive aggressive inclusiveness. Endless waffling about the community of christ, and open mouthed gapes at the heavens in wait for mana and miracles. All the while, their loved ones are falling out of the faith and into the pit......

They're all tools.