RealmOfThePureForms said:
O, ok
Perhaps you don't understand philosophical logic. If you're going to sit there and mock the logical facts which I mark clearly for the point of the arguement, perhaps you should not be here and should instead be in a forum of people like yourself who sit and bicker at logical ways of making arguements.
Perdonme pato, I wasn't aware that you're a resident member here. Actually, I don't see a point in joining an atheist forum, cause what I've seen, there's a lack of believer's, we'd just end up giving eachother hi-5's all the time. I like debate. If you cannot handle the heat, get the **** out of the kitchen.
My post was clear and as simple as could be to make the point as clearly as possible.
Ohh, you mean your post on a fallible being cannot say whether an infallible being exists? That's just a vestigal, misanthropistic, idealistic, hescient entreaty. You're saying we cannot understand an infallible God, right? Well then how do we know he wants worship? How the **** do we understand his book of holy commands? If this God fellow is truly so incomprehensible all this can't be answered as any answer will be trivial to such a God as to make them meaningless.
Hey, different strokes for different folks.:lol:
I am not arrogant and I am not going to waste my time making sarcastic remarks and acting like a child.
That's great.
I believe in searching for the truth whether it be God is real or God is not and I will not make rediculous assumptions on either until we as humans find a way to seek real answers for this.
Well in the highly unlikely event that he parks he shows his grill to us, I guess you'll be quiet for a very long time.
It is people with your mindset who hold back the progress of mankind by pretending you have all the answers.
Uhh, negative. By questing things, things get done. Everything was invented by people questioning things, not being held in shackels by some delphic man in the sky.
If you want to really discuss philosophy then do so, if you want to act like a forum troll and make sarcastic remarks then the philosophy forum isn't a place for you.
Sorry, but you cannot barge onto this forum and throw around incongrous 1 and 2 liners and expect
not to be called on them. If so, maybe this isn't the place for you.
Everywhere I go I run into people like you. People who are not interested in genuinely discussing the search for truth but just waiting in the wings to mock and attack anyone who disagrees with your extreme unprovable views.
Wow, that's quite a boisterous characterization. You got all that from a few posts, do ya? A little FYI, just because I hold heterodox views, does not mean I am wrong. Look at Bruno. He was burned at the stake for claiming that the earth was round and their was life on other planets, as it turns out, the minority was right (about the earth anyway).
That is EXACTLY what you declared when you spoke to the religionist in terms of the burden of proof being soley on him and those like him. The burden is as much on YOU as it is on him.
How did you come to this facinating conclusion? A thesit that asserts he
knows God exists, is required to prove it, otherwise a number of things can exist. He is making a positive assertion about reality that affects everyone. The burden of proof is on him. Now if an atheist claims God does not exist, they are also required to provide supporting evidence. But some claims do not need evidence, i.e. the earth is round. The burden of proof is always on the believer, not the doubter.
With your limited intellect you have no right to declare that a being of much higher intelligence than your own, possibly infallible, does not exist.
Sure do, it's a perfectly rational, logical assumption to make considering there is a huge lack of pragmatic evidence for such.
You try to discredit the notion of an entity greater than yourself by mocking someone else with a burden of proving santa claus. But behind your sarcastic remarks the burden of proof still lies with you to disprove the existence of being of higher intellect than your own. And with your current limited intellect you have no capability to do that. So in assuming that your religious opponent must prove God, you made the mistake of believing there was no burden on you.
O, so tiring. You're repeating the same old thing in parrot fashion. Listen, if someone claimed that they had Superman's powers, you would want them to do something unique to Superman, right, like lift a house or fly or something. If someone claimed his dog could talk, you would want to witness it. Even the apostle Paul had to see Jesus to believe that he resurrected. Every fantasic claim needs supporting evidence.
Greater intellect(superior being) > lesser intellect(human).
How basal you are.:lol:
If lesser intellect declares greater intellect exists and no proof exists, the assertion must be left open to discussion until lesser intellect can prove greater intellect does not exist. With no proof a lesser intellect cannot declare a greater intellect does not exist for the same reason that a lesser intellect cannot declare a greater intellect does exist.
Example.
We are in the 12th century.
The sun revolves around the earth.
There is no proof the sun does or does not revolve around the earth. All we see is a sun that comes up and does down each day.
Now if you were in the 12th century arguing the sun revolved around the earth and someone else told you the earth actually revolved around the sun and you acted like they were an idiot, you'd be acting exactly as you are now.
That's quite a leap. Tell me how this has any relevance to God. You are trying to compare a supernatural plane of existence, and a mystical entity that hurls thunderbolts at innocents to the revolution of the earth or sun?
At this moment in time we DO NOT have our telescope to tell us the truth. So stop acting like you have the right to get up on your ivory pedestal and mock those who choose to believe in a higher intelligence because at this moment in time YOU CAN'T disprove the philosophical question of our existence any more than they can prove it does exist.
Listen, mankind flys to the clouds everydy by airplane, no God fellow there, we went to the moon, no God fellow there either, we now can see hundreds of thousands of miles into space with high powere telescopes, but still nobody found a sky man sitting on a cloudy throne. If he would just show his face or do something spectacular, it would end all the hype, he had no problem appearing and doing great tricks in the OT.
