Why I'm not an Atheist and believe in what I believe.

[Taqiyya Mockingbird]

Padraic, I respect you taking an agnostic position but I can't say I agree with it as a logical stance.

You have already demonstrated that you haven't the slightest idea what "logical" is.

As far as being agnostic to my position, it's either:

(1) There exists an absolute morality and we have a link to that morality and relationship to it, and hence can know definite moral facts as true.

Bald, unsupported assertion-by-assertion. Non-sequitur.

(2) There doesn't exist an absolute morality and we have no relationship to it and we don't know moral facts.

Non-sequitur.False Dichotomy.

But if (1), then surely there is a way for you to know, since you been bestowed that knowledge as well. So you just have to sincerely ask yourself if you have that knowledge.

There are other ways to understand moral consequences than this idea of "objective morality". False Dichotomy, Black/White distorted thinking.

The same is true of knowledge of God.

And wait a damn minute -- now you are trying to sneak in this "god" idea through the back door. Begging the question, circular reasoning.

It's not like I would be special to have that knowledge while you wouldn't. But this question can be hard. A Muslim might state he doesn't know if killing apostates is wrong so follows hadiths and scholars verdict on that, but at the same time, I feel he does know. He knows deep inside. Others know more then deep inside, they know it all through their soul and being, nothing hiding.

Begging the question, circular reasoning.

So from my position, all I can do is advice reflection, what you deep down inside know.

Begging the question.

I am not proving it either way but you can prove to yourself one of these are true.

Same non-sequitur, circular reasoning, false dichotomy.

Any ways, this thread was originally to answer people's questions about why I believe what I believe.

Did someone actually ask you? Or is this really your proclaiming all this nonsense unbidden?

---

And exactly who called him a liar? I was pointing out that the process he was using to rationalize his beliefs was the same as that of a pathological liar,

Really, that is not how I or several others read it,including Mystic Knight .

Argumentum ad Populum.

What you wrote:

Pathos: Feelings

Logic: a particular mode of reasoning viewed as valid or faulty




Patho-Logical Liar: "I feel this must be true, therefore it is true."

My response was to what you actually wrote,rather than what you meant,what with not being a mind reader and all.

That's right. And what you DIDN'T see me write was "you are a pathological liar". Which, if you have seen any of my posts, is not something I would tap dance around for a second. Got it?