Tooth Fairy Bullshit

[Edwardo Piet]

That makes them perverts too.

And this is why I actually decided to open this thread despite it being yours so I could enjoy you being hurt and offended by the tooth fairy analogy.

Thanks for that by the way. It made me chuckle and I'm going to definitely use it more often now.

I also heard Jesus Christ loved buttsex very much. Both giving and receiving. He also liked to randomly shout "I'M NOT AS PLAUSIBLE AS YOU ARE!" at The Tooth Fairy before buggering it so hard its wings fell off. Neo is very much a fan of this image. And I don't mean that bloke out of the Matrix.

[Huggy Bear]

---

You responded to me AND Balco in the same post, I'm only referring to your response to me.

What the hell are you smoking?  I posted a quote FROM Balaco, I didn't respond TO Balaco.  That was all for you, buddy.

http://atheistforums.org/thread-47154-po...pid1488822

Belief and faith are synonymous, there is no difference...

That is absolutely not true.  In fact, most Christians don't even believe that.  I can't tell you how many times a Christian has told me that God couldn't prove himself because then we would have to believe and faith wouldn't be necessary.  In fact, that came up in a conversation I had rather recently here:

I had a similar experience with a similar outcome.  I finally came to the conclusion that the idea of an all-loving god who loved me more than I was even capable of loving would not lay down one right path, allow Satan to lay down tens/hundreds of thousands and then simply expect me to find the one right path on my own with the intention of lighting me on fire for all eternity if I were tricked into choosing wrong, as the Bible clearly says most people searching will be, was a massively idiotic idea.

I was taught that God doesn't give us undeniable proof of his existence as a test of faith...those with righteous minds would find him. Joker and any other Catholics, what are your thoughts on this?

So once again you're talking out your ass with absolute certainty about that which is literally impossible to know with any certainty.

You are clearly responding to Balaco there buddy, if not, you need to learn to format your posts better.

Wait... so your method of determining if a word is synonymous is whether or not it has the same number of references?

Did I EVER argue that they weren't synonyms?  I argued that when you said there was "no difference", that was wrong.  Faith IS a synonym of belief, but synonym does not mean "Means the same thing as the other word, in all instances, without question".  They are "synonyms", but there IS "a difference".  If there were "no difference" then the definitions would be the same.  There would be "no difference" in the definitions.

But all of this semantics bullshit aside, I have proved my point that "faith" and "belief" are commonly used as DIFFERENT words having DIFFERENT meanings.  I only took exception to the part where you said there was "no difference", so yeah, your facepalm graphic there hit the nail on the head because it is like pulling teeth trying to get a simple point across to you.

I stop reading when people start to bicker about the semantics.

Then stop reading.  I don't give a fuck.  Frankly this is one of the more intelligent responses I've gotten from you.  So, good job!  Way to raise the bar!  Now I'm going to expect it in the future, though.

Being synonymous doesn't mean there is no difference. Context is important. Boat is a synonym for canoe, but not all boats are canoes. All faith is belief, but not all belief is faith. Faith is a particular kind of belief. I believe the sun will come up in the morning. That is not equivalent to I have faith that God will regrow my lost arm. If there was truly no difference between the word 'belief' and the word 'faith', their definitions would be identical.

You see, it's not that hard.  It took Mister Agenda very little effort to examine what I was saying and determine, not only what it was that I was saying, but that it was accurate.  It's actually very simple.  "Synonymous" does not mean "Exactly the same in all instances; no difference"

Did you forget you gave an example of context?

I can't tell you how many times a Christian has told me that God couldn't prove himself because then we would have to believe and faith wouldn't be necessary.

Faith in God, and belief in God are the same thing.

[Asmodee]

What the hell are you smoking?  I posted a quote FROM Balaco, I didn't respond TO Balaco.  That was all for you, buddy.

http://atheistforums.org/thread-47154-po...pid1488822

Yeah, that's the point where I posted the quote from Balaco, as I said. You'll note that it was Balaco's reply to me that I posted. It was posted in a reply to you. I don't know how to explain simple sequential events any better than that. There was no "response to Balaco" there, in my response to you, where I quoted Balaco, but did not respond to him.

That is absolutely not true.  In fact, most Christians don't even believe that.  I can't tell you how many times a Christian has told me that God couldn't prove himself because then we would have to believe and faith wouldn't be necessary.  In fact, that came up in a conversation I had rather recently here:


So once again you're talking out your ass with absolute certainty about that which is literally impossible to know with any certainty.

You are clearly responding to Balaco there buddy, if not, you need to learn to format your posts better.

OH, I see where you went off now! No, YOU were talking out YOUR ass. The post from Balaco was an EXAMPLE of someone who used "faith" and "belief" as different words with different meanings. As was everything I typed in there, that was a response TO YOU. I was talking TO YOU that entire time. The post was an example of what I was saying TO YOU.

Did I EVER argue that they weren't synonyms?  I argued that when you said there was "no difference", that was wrong.  Faith IS a synonym of belief, but synonym does not mean "Means the same thing as the other word, in all instances, without question".  They are "synonyms", but there IS "a difference".  If there were "no difference" then the definitions would be the same.  There would be "no difference" in the definitions.

But all of this semantics bullshit aside, I have proved my point that "faith" and "belief" are commonly used as DIFFERENT words having DIFFERENT meanings.  I only took exception to the part where you said there was "no difference", so yeah, your facepalm graphic there hit the nail on the head because it is like pulling teeth trying to get a simple point across to you.


Then stop reading.  I don't give a fuck.  Frankly this is one of the more intelligent responses I've gotten from you.  So, good job!  Way to raise the bar!  Now I'm going to expect it in the future, though.

You see, it's not that hard.  It took Mister Agenda very little effort to examine what I was saying and determine, not only what it was that I was saying, but that it was accurate.  It's actually very simple.  "Synonymous" does not mean "Exactly the same in all instances; no difference"

Did you forget you gave an example of context?

I can't tell you how many times a Christian has told me that God couldn't prove himself because then we would have to believe and faith wouldn't be necessary.

Faith in God, and belief in God are the same thing.

Context are not important when there is "no difference". This is a simple concept. If there is "no difference" then context is irrelevant because "no difference" means they are always "the same", which would be true regardless of context. I see you're now trying to justify your blanket statement by injecting context, saying "faith in god" and "belief in god" instead of just "faith" and "belief" as you did in the text I originally applied to. Yes, if you change what you're saying enough after the fact you will eventually make it right. But that doesn't mean it was right all along.

Again, it took Mister Agenda very little effort to see what I am plainly saying. It is taking you considerably more effort not to see it.

[Huggy Bear]

Huggy,

Joke's on you. Did you ignore Krauss around second '47? The bit where he says empty space is filled? They are using the words 'empty space', but are telling you that the space isn't really empty. The clip also explains why your assertion was wrong, yet you offer it as evidence for your mistaken claim.

The other thing going on is that they are dumbing it down for the masses. If I asked them for the scientific use of 'empty space' they would reply with something along the lines of an unexcited area in a vacuum state and would in fact concede that the space you are talking about is not empty.

I was polite in an attempt to help you understand something better, but you doubled down by posting a video you also didn't fully nderstand.

*emphasis mine*


 
The space IS empty...

Krauss said the space is filled with electric fields, a field is simply an area where a force is exerted.


Since you took issue with the sugar cube comparison, I'll just go ahead a triple down.

http://www.physics.org/featuredetail.asp?id=41

Imagine squeezing all the space out of an atom. Well, if you did that to all the atoms in all the people in the world, you could indeed fit the entire human race in the volume of a sugar cube.

https://www.scienceabc.com/pure-sciences...-cube.html

What if I told you that the entire human race… yes, all 7.3 billion of us, don’t even require a space as large as your house? What if I told you that the entire human race could actually fit inside a sugar cube?

http://www.iflscience.com/space/you-coul...rspective/

Almost all of ordinary matter (99.9999999% of it) is empty space. If you took out all of the space in our atoms, the entire human race (all 7 billion of us) would fit into the volume of a sugar cube.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marcus-cho...ery/8057/0

The entire human race would fit in the volume of a sugar cube
This is because matter is incredibly, mind-boggling empty.

How about you present a source debunking that statement.

---

Context are not important when there is "no difference".  This is a simple concept.  If there is "no difference" then context is irrelevant because "no difference" means they are always "the same", which would be true regardless of context.  I see you're now trying to justify your blanket statement by injecting context, saying "faith in god" and "belief in god" instead of just "faith" and "belief" as you did in the text I originally applied to.  Yes, if you change what you're saying enough after the fact you will eventually make it right.  But that doesn't mean it was right all along.

Again, it took Mister Agenda very little effort to see what I am plainly saying.  It is taking you considerably more effort not to see it.

*emphasis mine*

That is untrue, one word can have completely different (and sometimes opposite) meanings depending on the context.

Faith and belief mean the same thing, that's not saying they are interchangeable, there are proper uses for one over the other.

For instance like: "loaning money in good faith" is simply saying "loaning money with the belief it will be repaid"

Nevertheless in the context you used, the words are interchangeable.

[I_am_not_mafia]

What point are you even trying to make about space Huggy? I didn't even know why you were referring to it when you first mentioned it. Something about perception of reality? Either way, it's completely irrelevant.

[robvalue]

It's like those gangs they have now. He's just randomly shooting at any atheist that says anything, and the reason for the beef has long since been forgotten.

Do you remember physical objects? Before we had all these virtual things? You used to be able to touch them. Hold them in your hand.

(Bonus points for anyone who identifies the comedian.)

[Fake Messiah]

How can anyone seriously believe that the motivating force to build the very first hospitals is in any way comparable to believing in the tooth fairy or Santa Claus?

Oh, yes. How can you compare multi billion dollar business like Catholic hospitals and force that made Sai Baba open hospital in Delhi

I mean sure Sai Baba was a fraud that opened hospital to widen his PR and business but Chatolics do it also so they can make people die out of curable diseases and don't forget the force that opened Catholic schools where priests sexually molest children and compare it to Tooth fairy when Tooth fairy is so much benign.

[Cato]

Huggy,

You haven't understood, or tried for that matter, a single thing I've said. Instead, you prefer to remain ignorant for pride's sake, it is beyond your capacity to admit misunderstanding or error. Isn't pride one of the seven deadly sins?

Stay ignorant my friend, I no longer give a shit.

[Asmodee]

Context are not important when there is "no difference".  This is a simple concept.  If there is "no difference" then context is irrelevant because "no difference" means they are always "the same", which would be true regardless of context.  I see you're now trying to justify your blanket statement by injecting context, saying "faith in god" and "belief in god" instead of just "faith" and "belief" as you did in the text I originally applied to.  Yes, if you change what you're saying enough after the fact you will eventually make it right.  But that doesn't mean it was right all along.

Again, it took Mister Agenda very little effort to see what I am plainly saying.  It is taking you considerably more effort not to see it.

*emphasis mine*

That is untrue, one word can have completely different (and sometimes opposite) meanings depending on the context.

Okay, let's try this again.  I'm going to post what you said, bold parts of it, post another thing and you try to spot what's wrong with it.  It's like a game, only nobody's having any fun.

Belief and faith are synonymous, there is no difference...

That is untrue, one word can have completely different (and sometimes opposite) meanings depending on the context.

Did you see it?  You just said EXACTLY what I've been telling you this whole time, and yet, somehow, you're arguing AGAINST what I'm saying!

Can we PLEASE just skip to the part where you say, "I get what you're saying now.  I did not mean that there was no difference ever, I meant it only in the context of that to which I was replying.  Of course the words are not synonymous 100% of the time and always entirely interchangeable and of course there are times when faith and belief have different, not entirely compatible meanings, their usage not being synonymous in those cases."  I PROMISE YOU, this was not some elaborate setup to get you to cop to anything so I could go, "AHA!"  I can't stand information that isn't entirely correct.  There's something wrong in my brain that makes it drive me nuts.  THAT is what this is about.  I was pointing out that they are not ALWAYS the same thing, that there IS a difference sometimes, which IS WHAT YOU JUST SAID!  That's it!  No hidden agenda, no trying to make you look bad, just pointing out that "no difference", put that plainly with no contextual qualifiers, was not accurate.

---

Huggy,

You haven't understood, or tried for that matter, a single thing I've said. Instead, you prefer to remain ignorant for pride's sake, it is beyond your capacity to admit misunderstanding or error. Isn't pride one of the seven deadly sins?

Stay ignorant my friend, I no longer give a shit.

I feel your pain.

[Crossless2.0]

Asmodee, it's our fault you weren't properly warned about Huggy.

Walk away and live your life while you can.