Faith is not "without evidence" argument

[ZenMode]

Another terriffic example of you leaping to conclusions without supporting facts.

Intelligent, educated and sane people understand that the path of human progress is measured in our written history. 2000 years ago, mankind had writing, irrigated crops and domesticated animals. The Great Pyramid of Giza was built about 4,500 years ago.

Modern anatomical man has been around for about 300,000 years. Modern thinking man is thought to have been around for about 30,000 years. Why didn't we leap to the Moon 28,000 years ago?

Did you go to college, 'Mode? Do you have any professional skills?

The point is that every belief about the existence of gods is made up. No one story is any more valid or reasonable than the next. So, if you erase every memory and document about all of the thousands of gods that man has believed in, there would be no basis for man to recreate those same gods. Sure, some civilizations would create new gods, but since there is no evidence for any one of the previous gods, it would be blind chance if man came up with a story similar to a previous god's story.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

This is why I think you and 'Murica are so much alike: You both leap to conclusions without evidence. By saying "consistently" you are inferring that God answers prayers.

If a young parent prays for their child to not die of cancer why would God ever allow their child to die of cancer?

(I am not about to say God doesn't answer all prayers because sometimes things happen by chance which those who are prone to belief would think is an answer to a prayer...it has to be consistent to be meaningful and not random chance).

Of course you do, Perry. You also claimed to have a PhD. Your understanding of Pascal's Wager is erroneous. Another trait you share with both 'Murica and 'Mode.

Then perhaps you, in your infinite knowledge could clarify it for me.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

The point is that every belief about the existence of gods is made up. No one story is any more valid or reasonable than the next. So, if you erase every memory and document about all of the thousands of gods that man has believed in, there would be no basis for man to recreate those same gods. Sure, some civilizations would create new gods, but since there is no evidence for any one of the previous gods, it would be blind chance if man came up with a story similar to a previous god's story.

Nice theory. One you purport to be as factual as a Bible-thumper claims about the story of Eden, both with the same amount of evidence.

Why do you persist in pushing your beliefs as fact when the logical POV is "I don't know"?

The fact you keep dodging questions while I answer yours is a telling point. Do you know why I think people who have socks are dishonest and often liars?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

If a young parent prays for their child to not die of cancer why would God ever allow their child to die of cancer?

(I am not about to say God doesn't answer all prayers because sometimes things happen by chance which those who are prone to belief would think is an answer to a prayer...it has to be consistent to be meaningful and not random chance).

Then perhaps you, in your infinite knowledge could clarify it for me.

Why not? If you believe the child has an immortal soul shouldn't God let the child die as quickly and painlessly as possible?

You're dull-witted sarcasm is just more evidence you never graduated college, Perry, along with your jealousy of those who did.

 

[ZenMode]

Nice theory. One you purport to be as factual as a Bible-thumper claims about the story of Eden, both with the same amount of evidence.

Why do you persist in pushing your beliefs as fact when the logical POV is "I don't know"?

The fact you keep dodging questions while I answer yours is a telling point. Do you know why I think people who have socks are dishonest and often liars?

What would be the basis for determining the story about the Christian God, without the Bible or anyone around to tell the story? Scientists could eventually tell the story about how the Grand canyon came into existence or how old the polar ice caps are or the story of prehistoric man. How does the story of the Christian God get recreated?

 

[Saint Guinefort]

Why not? If you believe the child has an immortal soul shouldn't God let the child die as quickly and painlessly as possible?

You're dull-witted sarcasm is just more evidence you never graduated college, Perry, along with your jealousy of those who did.

So you can't explain Pascal's Wager?

Got it.

Thanks.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

What would be the basis for determining the story about the Christian God, without the Bible or anyone around to tell the story?

Scientists could eventually tell the story about how the Grand canyon came into existence or how old the polar ice caps are or the story of prehistoric man.

How does the story of the Christian God get recreated?

Nothing to my knowledge.

Most cultures have origin stories. Why does only the Jewish/Christian/Muslim origin story give you heartburn?

You keep calling it "the Christian God". Why only "the Christian God" and not the Abrahamic God, which is much more accurate. Are you a college dropout like Perry? 'Murica? If you'd gone to college and studied "world religions", maybe you'd have a better understanding of this matter, 'Mode.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

So you can't explain Pascal's Wager?

Got it.

Thanks.

Yes, I can, Perry. Let me Google it for you since you 1) can't do it yourself and 2) have no idea what it means: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pascal-wager/

Pascal maintains that we are incapable of knowing whether God exists or not, yet we must “wager” one way or the other. Reason cannot settle which way we should incline, but a consideration of the relevant outcomes supposedly can....

No need to thank me, Perry. I'm always happy to help the less fortunate.

 

[ZenMode]

Nothing to my knowledge.

Most cultures have origin stories. Why does only the Jewish/Christian/Muslim origin story give you heartburn?

You keep calling it "the Christian God". Why only "the Christian God" and not the Abrahamic God, which is much more accurate. Are you a college dropout like Perry? 'Murica? If you'd gone to college and studied "world religions", maybe you'd have a better understanding of this matter, 'Mode.

I call it the Christian God because it is the god that Christians believe in.

I care nothing about Christians, Muslims or anyone else who believes in imaginary beings.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

I call it the Christian God because it is the god that Christians believe in.

I care nothing about Christians, Muslims or anyone else who believes in imaginary beings.

Jesus was a Jew. Muslims believe in the God of Abraham. Why do you single out the Christians, cite the Old Testament, which is Jewish origin, and not admit you're both antisemitic and anti-Muslim?

 

[IBDaMann]

Hey, IBDaMan....your posts are loaded up with GIANT GRAPHICS anymore....what gives????????? Is the end of the world????

I ran out of funding for graphics in early September and I need to wait until the new fiscal year to resume.

 

[Into Тhe Night]

Why not? It's logical. If a woman doesn't want to have a baby or it's defective, better to just neutralize it. That's logical. Why would an avowed atheist be against abortion? You ran from the mass extermination of worthless people, 'Murica. Why?

"Avowed atheist."

What the fuck does that even mean? I took a pledge to be an atheist? You sound like an Evangelical.

 

[ZenMode]

Jesus was a Jew. Muslims believe in the God of Abraham. Why do you single out the Christians, cite the Old Testament, which is Jewish origin, and not admit you're both antisemitic and anti-Muslim?

Antisemitic??? Lol. Ooooooo-k.

Attacking the messenger because you can't attack the message.

 

[Into Тhe Night]

I ran out of funding for graphics in early September and I need to wait until the new fiscal year to resume.

You're just a typical arrogant Trumper.

 

[Into Тhe Night]

Yes, I can, Perry. Let me Google it for you since you 1) can't do it yourself and 2) have no idea what it means: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pascal-wager/


No need to thank me, Perry. I'm always happy to help the less fortunate.

Pascal's Wager is flawed. Hitchens explains it well in his book God Is Not Great.

 

[IBDaMann]

Oh. You have strawman questions.

You don't get to declare the value of my questions. I'm the one asking them. I ask them because you made a comment that generated those questions.

Answer the questions honestly or retract your comment.

That's why ignored them.

Nope. You EVADED my questions because you are a dishonest, cowardly leftist troll.

First, I don't support abortion if the baby is developed enough to survive on its own.

Stupid position. You support the killing of living humans who have not committed any crime. That makes you a shitty person.

Second, a [sufficiently young living human] doesn't think.

You don't know this. Your pretense of omniscience is summarily dismissed.

Also, it is totally irrelevant, as is most of your smokescreen. The killing of living humans who have not committed any crime is done by the worst people humanity has to offer. You wish to be one of them and that is nothing of which to be proud.

Third, I don't support abortion for "convenience."

Would you support legislation that outlaws all killing of living humans who have not committed any crime, punishable as a murder, except in the case in which evidence shows a high likelihood a mother will lose her life if her pregnancy were to run to term and to giving birth?

I would only advocate for abortion in certain dire situations, like if it becomes evident that the baby will be born with a terrible condition resulting in a poor quality of life

Would you be OK if I had the government send over a team to kill you, provided I filled out all the necessary paperwork clearly showing that it is evident that you are a living humans who has a terrible condition "leftist stupid" relegating you to poor quality of life? Note: you don't get any say in the matter, you don't have any standing in court and you don't get any legal counsel to petition for a reprieve. You're totally fine with that idea, right?

 

[Into Тhe Night]

You don't get to declare the value of my questions. I'm the one asking them. I ask them because you made a comment that generated those questions.

Answer the questions honestly or retract your comment.


Nope. You EVADED my questions because you are a dishonest, cowardly leftist troll.


Stupid position. You support the killing of living humans who have not committed any crime. That makes you a shitty person.


You don't know this. Your pretense of omniscience is summarily dismissed.

Also, it is totally irrelevant, as is most of your smokescreen. The killing of living humans who have not committed any crime is done by the worst people humanity has to offer. You wish to be one of them and that is nothing of which to be proud.


Would you support legislation that outlaws all killing of living humans who have not committed any crime, punishable as a murder, except in the case in which evidence shows a high likelihood a mother will lose her life if her pregnancy were to run to term and to giving birth?


Would you be OK if I had the government send over a team to kill you, provided I filled out all the necessary paperwork clearly showing that it is evident that you are a living humans who has a terrible condition "leftist stupid" relegating you to poor quality of life? Note: you don't get any say in the matter, you don't have any standing in court and you don't get any legal counsel to petition for a reprieve. You're totally fine with that idea, right?

This is why I don't take you seriously. Between putting words in my mouth and jumping to absurd conclusions based on faulty strawman logic, you're not worth my time. I was nice by answering your questions, and here you are being a twat.

There is nothing wrong with terminating an early pregnancy. A microscopic clump of cells is not a sentient, sapient being. Stop being so fucking religulous.

 

[Into Тhe Night]

The evidence for any gods is all the same, basically. Some human or humans make a claim, write it down in some format and people believe it or don't.

Looking at Christianity, if there were a way to erase every memory of Christianity from peoples' minds, and remove every copy of the Bible that ever existed, Christianity would cease to exist because they were being no basis, or evidence, for its existence.

Conversely, if you were to erase all existence of scientific documentation, evidence of scientific advancement and memory from everyone's minds, in 2000 years or so we would be right back where we are now.

The Bible looks exactly like something you'd expect a bunch of sun-baked desert-dwelling idiots to write.

 

[IBDaMann]

You're just a typical arrogant Trumper.

ad hominem is all you have. You don't have any answers to direct questions to your own comments. You're a leftist troll.

 

[Into Тhe Night]

ad hominem is all you have. You don't have any answers to direct questions to your own comments. You're a leftist troll.

I've explained that your questions are typical strawmen and I used your three abortion questions as examples. I'm close to putting you on my ignore list, old man.