Quotes acceptance

[Rwandrall]

Only one. I wasn't ready with my ideas when I talked with the 2 Jephova's, when they were nicely showing me skydadies's big plan. I was just presenting my perfect trap theory. I am not trying to school you. I'm sorry it looked like that as it was not my intention.

Perfect ? You really think your trap theory is perfect ? I honestly think that any theist who knows their stuff can counter it easily.

Yup, I wrote up the agument. The next day I showed it to her and she was silent. I asked her what her best excuse was and she that I had to have faith.

One person is not enough to establish that you have made the final argument proving religion is wrong. Remember that atheists have been trying to do that for 2000 years. You are overestimating yourself

Brain security is the ability the brain has to protect itself from emotional attacks that come from anti-critical thinking ideas. It's stronger in some and weaker in some. It kind of depends on the person.

So the more religious a person is the more they are inclined to accept other irrational beliefs ? This does make sense.

Ok. I have chronic back pain, multiple std's, asbergers, religion disease, and autism.
The las one is true and I now have a sore throat to boot.

Well i dont know jack shit about autism but you seem to be doing well with communicating to others so good for ya

I guess forum unwritten rules are a little hard to grasp for many. Mostly my issue is that you switch from apologizing for being rude, to, you know...being rude On and off. It's a bit strange. You also seem to act a little superior by assuming that you are right about everything, which seems presomtuous.

I am still a bit confused why the longest quote is so bad as I have rudely shown in my responses the argument shredding. Is my trap theory still a bad one, even though my argument for it is clearly bad?

Well that theory is basically what every single atheist uses when discussing with theists. Plowing through their excuses one by one until they are backed into a corner. It's not really new

[Emporion]

Perfect ? You really think your trap theory is perfect ? I honestly think that any theist who knows their stuff can counter it easily.

OOO. Can you come up with anything that breaks my irrationally catching trap theory? Shall we take this to R'ley, then?

One person is not enough to establish that you have made the final argument proving religion is wrong. Remember that atheists have been trying to do that for 2000 years. You are overestimating yourself

awwwwww! But I like my argument! I came up with on my OWN!!!!

Brain security is the ability the brain has to protect itself from emotional attacks that come from anti-critical thinking ideas. It's stronger in some and weaker in some. It kind of depends on the person.

So the more religious a person is the more they are inclined to accept other irrational beliefs ? This does make sense.

Thats right.

Ok. I have chronic back pain, multiple std's, asbergers, religion disease, and autism.
The las one is true and I now have a sore throat to boot.


Well i dont know jack shit about autism but you seem to be doing well with communicating to others so good for ya

Thanks.

I guess forum unwritten rules are a little hard to grasp for many. Mostly my issue is that you switch from apologizing for being rude, to, you know...being rude On and off. It's a bit strange. You also seem to act a little superior by assuming that you are right about everything, which seems presomtuous.

Well done!! I think that I am right. On the other hand, I get the feeling that I'm wrong because of all the skepticism surrounding my argument presentation. Maybe I am wrong. Do you think it's bad to have zero tolerance for irrationality except for entertainment uses?

Well that theory is basically what every single atheist uses when discussing with theists. Plowing through their excuses one by one until they are backed into a corner. It's not really new

I like my version because it's short. Do you have a shorter one?

[corndog36]

You mean the religionist's will be more confrontational? How could I write the argument better?

The religionist will be more confrontational because they already have doubts and are afraid that they might be forced to face them. I can't tell you how to express your thoughts effectively, it's a learning processes, and one thing you have learned in this discussion is to know your audience. If you can understand why they might be resistive to your logical arguments that's the first step in finding ways to get past their defenses. As for improving your statements, look closely at the feedback, both positive and negative, and try to use that feedback to improve your presentation. The more receptive you are to criticism the more you will get, and the more opportunity to hone your communication skills. (I love criticism, don't get nearly as much as I used to, kinda miss it.)

[Emporion]

You mean the religionist's will be more confrontational? How could I write the argument better?

The religionist will be more confrontational because they already have doubts and are afraid that they might be forced to face them. I can't tell you how to express your thoughts effectively, it's a learning processes, and one thing you have learned in this discussion is to know your audience. If you can understand why they might be resistive to your logical arguments that's the first step in finding ways to get past their defenses. As for improving your statements, look closely at the feedback, both positive and negative, and try to use that feedback to improve your presentation. The more receptive you are to criticism the more you will get, and the more opportunity to hone your communication skills. (I love criticism, don't get nearly as much as I used to, kinda miss it.)

Ok, thanks for the advice.

[Rwandrall]

Lets start by your first assumption: "There is no proof that that any writings about religious beliefs are
divinely inspired by God."
"Jesus recognized the Old Testament as fact, and thousands of prophecies show that it was inspired by a being who knew the future. Also, the Bible is the most well-made and perfect book written over several centuries. Such perfection could not have been made by man."

So now you have to prove:

-Jesus is not real or at least is not God.
-The prophecies are bullshit.
-The Bible is not at all perfect.

So your argument is not enough to finish the debate on God.

[Emporion]

"Jesus recognized the Old Testament as fact, and thousands of prophecies show that it was inspired by a being who knew the future. Also, the Bible is the most well-made and perfect book written over several centuries. Such perfection could not have been made by man."

That came out of the bible, as we know, can't be relied on for assumptions. So how does that disprove my first sentence?

[Rwandrall]

That came out of the bible, as we know, can't be relied on for assumptions. So how does that disprove my first sentence?

There is a difference between the Old and the New Testament. Some characters from the New Testament are real and have been identified as such.

[Rhizomorph13]

"Jesus recognized the Old Testament as fact, and thousands of prophecies show that it was inspired by a being who knew the future. Also, the Bible is the most well-made and perfect book written over several centuries. Such perfection could not have been made by man."

That came out of the bible, as we know, can't be relied on for assumptions. So how does that disprove my first sentence?

Do we KNOW that the bible can't be relied on? Do you have evidence that supports your positive claim that the bible can't be relied on? Even if the bible is proven to be unreliable that doesn't mean that Jesus wasn't who he claimed to be.

---

That came out of the bible, as we know, can't be relied on for assumptions. So how does that disprove my first sentence?

There is a difference between the Old and the New Testament. Some characters from the New Testament are real and have been identified as such.

So if my Superman comic had real characters in it then that means that the rest of the comic is to be believed?

[Emporion]

Do we KNOW that the bible can't be relied on? Do you have evidence that supports your positive claim that the bible can't be relied on? Even if the bible is proven to be unreliable that doesn't mean that Jesus wasn't who he claimed to be.

---

The believers have no scientific evidence and the burden of proof is on them. So I don't have to disprove it. I do it because it makes me feel superior to them, which I am.

That came out of the bible, as we know, can't be relied on for assumptions. So how does that disprove my first sentence?

There is a difference between the Old and the New Testament. Some characters from the New Testament are real and have been identified as such.

So if my Superman comic had real characters in it then that means that the rest of the comic is to be believed?

The superman comic is a myth even if it is based on a real being.

Same reason for the OT and NT.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

Wait, are you THE David Tauraso?! Hey everyone, David Tauraso is posting in our forums! /sarcasm

How rude!

Next what's next, saying you've never heard of Tarquin St John Shagnasty? Eg "Human beings are only animals with delusions of grandeur"

(the emoticons are still not working for me)