• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Scientists discover that atheists might not exist, and that’s not a joke...

^^^^^^Triple post winner^^^^^^

I should really have waited to see if there were more coming
 
JH Oldoc said:
^^^^^^Triple post winner^^^^^^

I should really have waited to see if there were more coming
Click to expand...
You’re quite silly. I take it that we should not actually take seriously anything at all that you say. That you are here just for game-playing silliness.
 
JH Oldoc said:
So basically you realize the mistake you made.

Well, happy arguing, Gordy. LoLz
Click to expand...
I see you're dodging the question and continuing to play games. If I made any mistake, it was putting up with your trolling this long. Fortunately, that's a mistake I can rectify.
 
watsup said:
You’re quite silly. I take it that we should not actually take seriously anything at all that you say. That you are here just for game-playing silliness.
Click to expand...
And trolling. Don't forget the trolling.
 
What.... wait... let me check.... yup I exist

Next
 
yankintx said:
What.... wait... let me check.... yup I exist

Next
Click to expand...
Me too, and I'm holding a glass of water right now, but I can't prove it....so....

Say, would you guys like some music to twist by? It looks silly w/o the music.

 
JH Oldoc said:
Me too, and I'm holding a glass of water right now, but I can't prove it....so....
Click to expand...
There is, of course, a difference between a claim about a deity, and a claim about holding a glass of water. People can hold glasses of water all the time, so it is a very mundane claim.

No one has shown any objective evidence , or for that matter, a coherent and testable definition of what a god is.
 
RAMOSS said:
There is, of course, a difference between a claim about a deity, and a claim about holding a glass of water. People can hold glasses of water all the time, so it is a very mundane claim.

No one has shown any objective evidence , or for that matter, a coherent and testable definition of what a god is.
Click to expand...
I've seen no evidence of it in this material world, I think Gordy, because he is dedicated to the search for truth about the existence of God, and being very thorough, has turned over every figurative rock and also found nothing. There has been raging debate in fact over whether, if God (if it exists), being of the spirit can descend into matter, or if it is absent in this world. Some call this the Realm of Satan for that reason.
What I wonder is - If God (if it exists) is not to be found in matter, and that
"Claiming God does not exist as fact is logically indefensible" then where to seek it?
 
JH Oldoc said:
I've seen no evidence of it in this material world, I think Gordy, because he is dedicated to the search for truth about the existence of God, and being very thorough, has turned over every figurative rock and also found nothing. There has been raging debate in fact over whether, if God (if it exists), being of the spirit can descend into matter, or if it is absent in this world. Some call this the Realm of Satan for that reason.
What I wonder is - If God (if it exists) is not to be found in matter, and that
"Claiming God does not exist as fact is logically indefensible" then where to seek it?
Click to expand...
Can you give a definition of what 'spirit' is without resorting to purely conceptual terms? Can you describe what a 'being of spriit' is without resorting to pure metaphysics?
 
RAMOSS said:
Can you give a definition of what 'spirit' is without resorting to purely conceptual terms? Can you describe what a 'being of spriit' is without resorting to pure metaphysics?
Click to expand...
Only in negation, friend, has it - that I know - been referred. If it is non-material, we as finite beings, with all the associated limitations, can't comprehend it, much less define it. That is why some refer to it (if it exists) as the Ineffable or Unity - w/o differentiation.
 
RAMOSS said:
Can you give a definition of what 'spirit' is without resorting to purely conceptual terms? Can you describe what a 'being of spriit' is without resorting to pure metaphysics?
Click to expand...
Imagination. Fantasy. Delusion, ect..
 
JH Oldoc said:
Only in negation, friend, has it - that I know - been referred. If it is non-material, we as finite beings, with all the associated limitations, can't comprehend it, much less define it. That is why some refer to it (if it exists) as the Ineffable or Unity - w/o differentiation.
Click to expand...

And yet you just defined something something using words, despite being finite.
 
JH Oldoc said:
Only in negation, friend, has it - that I know - been referred. If it is non-material, we as finite beings, with all the associated limitations, can't comprehend it, much less define it. That is why some refer to it (if it exists) as the Ineffable or Unity - w/o differentiation.
Click to expand...

Still hiding the nonexistent behind the term ineffable. Very convenient. And totally dishonest.
 
JH Oldoc said:
Only in negation, friend, has it - that I know - been referred. If it is non-material, we as finite beings, with all the associated limitations, can't comprehend it, much less define it. That is why some refer to it (if it exists) as the Ineffable or Unity - w/o differentiation.
Click to expand...
That sounds like an excuse NOT to be able to define it. it's almost as if it doesn't actually exist.
 
devildavid said:
No, you called something "the Ineffable". You used it as a noun, not an adjective.
Click to expand...
That's what an epithet is, Davey.

Just don't mistake the finger for the moon as the old saying goes.
 
JH Oldoc said:
Only in negation, friend, has it - that I know - been referred. If it is non-material, we as finite beings, with all the associated limitations, can't comprehend it, much less define it. That is why some refer to it (if it exists) as the Ineffable or Unity - w/o differentiation.
Click to expand...

You’re no different from the rest of ‘em. One shows up every so often, making their particular claims about “god” and misusing all sorts of terms and definitions in order to support their fantastical claim. Anybody can claim pretty much anything without the slightest bit of real evidence, as you are now doing,
 
watsup said:
their particular claims about “god”
Click to expand...
What claims have I made?
I'm only trying to help Gordy in his quest.
watsup said:
Fantastical:
unreal
lacking in reality or substance or genuineness; not corresponding to acknowledged facts or criteria
Click to expand...
mmmm no, because that doesn't answer the question how would you define something that does exist that's incomprehensible - if such a thing did exist.
Now remember we are entertaining the possibility of such a thing because:

"Claiming God does not exist as fact is logically indefensible"
 
JH Oldoc said:
If something undefinable did exist how would you define it?
Click to expand...
By how it interacts with other things, and how that interaction is measured.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom