How humans are "slaves", and how that leads to the existence of God.

[abaris]

What I do is just carrying the candle.

Yes, and I'm not holding my breath for some tangible evidence.

[TheRocketSurgeon]

So then you agree that it's a complete waste of time for you to come here and vomit your unsubstantiated bullshit.

You've now resorted to the "it's true because I'm special" defense. Such a pretty snowflake.

It depends on your understanding of the word "meant", and "fate".
Despite God knowledge of the future, he is just. Actually, we decide our own fate through our actions.

If somebody did not believe, it's because of their actions. And the more they commit fatal flaws, the more they disbelieve.  God will not grant them guidance unless they act and think in the right direction.

What I do is just carrying the candle.

Noooooo, what you do is called "bullshit". I'm not saying BS because I disagree with the concepts you present, but because of the way in which you present them. You are bullshitting us, and we call you on it. 

We have explained to you why the things you posit about your "just" God are impossible... then you come back with "commit fatal flaws" and "act and think in the right direction". What. The. Actual. Fuck. Is. That?

You're just chewing up and regurgitating word salad versions of the "you must believe before you can understand The Truth™ of my religion" argument. The theological equivalent of "just the tip".

[Redbeard The Pink]

No, actually by quoting the Quran it means quoting what I think God is saying about your argument

Ok...so what do you think Ali Baba, Prince of Thieves says about my argument? Or Big Bird? I'd love to know what Big Bird thinks of it. I'm a huge fan of his.

So, you see the word "There is nothing like unto Him", as him being a thing ?
Even the word "thing" can't apply to him according that verse.

No, that's not necessarily what it's saying. If a thing is unique, then it is perfectly reasonable to say there is "nothing else like unto" it and still be describing a thing. Nothing in that text precludes it from talking about a thing.

I don't think so. It's not like you gave an evidence that convinced me.

Special Pleading is defined as follows:

Special Pleading is a fallacy in which a person applies standards, principles, rules, etc. to others while taking herself (or those she has a special interest in) to be exempt, without providing adequate justification for the exemption.

Because your argument hinges on Gaud being the only part of reality that doesn't have to follow the rule that everything must be the product of an action without adequate justification for why he doesn't have to follow that rule, your argument is special pleading. Pure and simple.


So there. I gave the definition of Special Pleading, and showed how your argument clearly meets it. If you claim to need more evidence than that, you're not honest.

[robvalue]

Would it be acceptable if I said this:

"I'm warning you that if you don't subscribe to my YouTube channel, my big brother will hack your computer at some point in the future and erase all your data."

[TheRocketSurgeon]

Would it be acceptable if I said this:

"I'm warning you that if you don't subscribe to my YouTube channel, my big brother will hack your computer at some point in the future and erase all your data."

That depends. Who am I to question your brother's overwhelming power and control over my life? If he's that much greater than I am, perhaps I deserve what I get because I'm a bad person and chose to willfully disobey you (the prophet who informed me of your brother's wrath in store for me if I disobey, of course). I was given a chance to obey you him, and I chose to ignore it. Clearly, then, your brother has no option but to delete all my data.

[robvalue]

Exactly. And remember any words you would normally use to describe this kind of behaviour such as threatening, blackmail, manipulation and thinly veiled personal agenda can't be said about me because I mentioned big brothers.

[WinterHold]

TheRocketSurgeon


But that cluster of theories is what I concluded from the Quran, and it is what I believe in, TRS. I will not hold an answer; I'm not making things up, I already believe in this and I already found the counter for that argument a long time ago.

I believe in the Quran. and here's a verse about those fatal acts :

(Sura 4 Verse 168 )   Indeed, those who disbelieve and commit wrong [or injustice] - never will Allah forgive them, nor will He guide them to a path.

And the more you do bad acts, the more that God sends you astray :

Sura 2
( 10 )   In their hearts is disease, so Allah has increased their disease; and for them is a painful punishment because they [habitually] used to lie.

( 11 )   And when it is said to them, "Do not cause corruption on the earth," they say, "We are but reformers."
( 12 )   Unquestionably, it is they who are the corrupters, but they perceive [it] not.

Believe me. I found a sensible argument I will stop doing what I do. But when every argument thrown against me, I find for it a response in the Quran, wouldn't that makes me more of a believer ?

something like when atheists make fun of me. I immediately go to this verse :

Sura 7
( 65 )   And to the 'Aad [We sent] their brother Hud. He said, "O my people, worship Allah; you have no deity other than Him. Then will you not fear Him?"
( 66 )   Said the eminent ones who disbelieved among his people, "Indeed, we see you in foolishness, and indeed, we think you are of the liars."

Then again, what I said (and always say) is that you need to good acts in order to see the truth; isn't that the negation of "doing bad acts in order to not see the truth" ?

Redbeard The Pink

Meeting the accusation of the special pleading, I view God as a special condition (sorry ; my major is computer science).
So no, I don't think special pleading applies to me here.

When I say "zero" is a special number, is that special pleading ?

[TheRocketSurgeon]

And they wonder why we consider religion to be a mental poison!

[robvalue]

Yeah. I've been trying to help the guy. He sounds really unhappy, because he thinks there's a gun to his head. So much so that he's trying to convince us there's a gun to our head too to try and save his own ass.

We can all see there is no gun. This is all needless angst.

If you have to try that hard to show me there's a gun to my head, maybe you need to consider that you might be wrong. One of us is seriously deluded. I've been alive 38 years and I've seen fuck all. Just millions of theists all telling me to do what they say or else. Only in a religious context is this behaviour socially acceptable, and I don't see why it should be.

It's not hard to write in a book, "People are going to tell you that you're wrong. But you're not, they're wrong."

[Redbeard The Pink]

Redbeard The Pink

Meeting the accusation of the special pleading, I view God as a special condition (sorry ; my major is computer science).
So no, I don't think special pleading applies to me here.

When I say "zero" is a special number, is that special pleading ?

No, the zero thing is not special pleading. For the most part, zero follows the same rules other numbers follow, and the few special rules regarding the number zero are adequately supported by good reasons.


Gaud, on the other hand, is a "special condition" for no other reason besides you and your book saying so (or "because he's Gaud," which is circular), which is why that is special pleading. You do not have adequate justification to treat Gaud as a special case against the premises you've laid out, and so your argument is a special pleading fallacy.