Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 … 39

Topic closed

2010-05-31 11:36:42
eleven bravo
Member
+1,399|5256|foggy bottom
youre the one that said "prove to me that god exists"  I dont know what the fuck youre referring to.  I think rage atheist are just as equally retarded as raging religious nuts. 

in fact, my experience has shown me that these raging atheists are just jaded and bitter and actually DO believe in god and they say the things they say to spite a god that they really do believe in.

so, prove to you god exists?  prove to me that he doesnt.
Tu Stultus Es
2010-05-31 11:38:02
Morpheus
This shit still going?
+508|5996|The Mitten

ruisleipa wrote:

lmfao are you two fucking each other?

which god are you talking about? I'm talking about the judaeo-christian one mainly but there's no allah either. Or do you think otherwise?
prove it.

pick one, prove it.
EE (hats
2010-05-31 11:42:05
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6402|North Carolina

DesertFox- wrote:

ruisleipa wrote:

DesertFox- wrote:

Highlighted for great justice and the mentally inept. This isn't the proper thread for this manner of discussion, but you imply that one side of an unknowable argument is better than the other. Putting one baseless argument on the high ground against the baseless opposite is downright foolish. A good deal of your posts are trollish in nature, though, so it's to be expected.
riiight

prove to me that god exists and then i'll be interested. otherwise, forget about it.
Neither side has proof, and the existence of any sort of God has so much emphasis placed on it nowadays that people act like somehow disproving the existence of a deity would render that belief system invalid when the idea of religion revolves around a hell of a lot more than just worshipping a deity.
I don't agree with ruis's approach in this, and I admit that I sometimes say things that target the religious (like I did in the most recent Israel-Palestine thread), but I do have to say that the famous quote "We're all atheists about most gods, but some of us are just one god further in this atheism" is pretty true.

So, with the exception of agnostics, all of us choose to disbelieve in most gods.  There are just some of us who choose not to believe in any of them.
2010-05-31 11:46:08
ruisleipa
Member
+149|6219|teh FIN-land

DesertFox- wrote:

Neither side has proof, and the existence of any sort of God has so much emphasis placed on it nowadays that people act like somehow disproving the existence of a deity would render that belief system invalid when the idea of religion revolves around a hell of a lot more than just worshipping a deity.
but take away the deity and what are you left with?
2010-05-31 11:53:50
blademaster
I'm moving to Brazil
+2,075|6642

ruisleipa wrote:

DesertFox- wrote:

Neither side has proof, and the existence of any sort of God has so much emphasis placed on it nowadays that people act like somehow disproving the existence of a deity would render that belief system invalid when the idea of religion revolves around a hell of a lot more than just worshipping a deity.
but take away the deity and what are you left with?
how do you feel about  Budhism and Hinduism since they believe in multiple deities aka Gods?
2010-05-31 11:54:30
Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5583

Buddhism doesn't have any Gods.
2010-05-31 11:57:15
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6402|North Carolina

Macbeth wrote:

Buddhism doesn't have any Gods.
Eh... sort of.  Buddhism is more about a state of mind.  Essentially, the Buddha basically serves the same purpose as a god, and the goal of Buddhism is to reach the same mindset that allows one to become one with the Buddha/nirvana.

It's much more intellectual than most religions, but it still relies on a lot of unprovable assumptions.
2010-05-31 12:01:28
ruisleipa
Member
+149|6219|teh FIN-land

blademaster wrote:

how do you feel about  Budhism and Hinduism since they believe in multiple deities aka Gods?
I have practiced Buddhism in the past so I'm pretty alright about it.

Don't really have an opinion about Hinduism tbh. Pretty dumb probably.

I object to the idea that there is a god sitting on a cloud making judgements on us. It's blatantly false and a tool for control. It's so obvious. That is my gripe and why I say believing in THAT KIND OF God is retarded. However, if you consider 'God' to be something like a non-conscious togetherness or love or some hippy thing...well I have more sympathy for the hippies, let's say.
2010-05-31 12:02:06
11 Bravo
Banned
+965|5234|Cleveland, Ohio

ruisleipa wrote:

I have practiced Buddhism in the past so I'm pretty alright about it.
o rly?
2010-05-31 12:02:52
Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5583

ruisleipa wrote:

I have practiced Buddhism in the past so I'm pretty alright about it.
hahahahahahahahahahahaha

Ruis is a weeboo.
2010-05-31 12:09:15
blademaster
I'm moving to Brazil
+2,075|6642

Macbeth wrote:

Buddhism doesn't have any Gods.
According to some Buddhists " Buddhism has no one all powerful  creator god" also they state that there are god like figures who have gained enlightenment and could enter Nirvana but instead they choose to stay in this world and help others... and they believe there are thousands of them...

Also in Buddhism you can choose to believe in one God, or none, or many gods..  there are different forms/variations of Buddhism kind of like Christianity but somewhat different on the other spectrum, Marayana Buddhist which are Tibetan and Zen do believe in many gods...

Last edited by blademaster (2010-05-31 12:10:21)

2010-05-31 12:09:59
Wreckognize
Member
+294|6482

Macbeth wrote:

ruisleipa wrote:

I have practiced Buddhism in the past so I'm pretty alright about it.
hahahahahahahahahahahaha

Ruis is a weeboo.
Yea because Buddhism is exclusively Japanese.

Last edited by Wreckognize (2010-05-31 12:10:14)

2010-05-31 12:11:26
Trotskygrad
бля
+354|5997|Vortex Ring State

Wreckognize wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

ruisleipa wrote:

I have practiced Buddhism in the past so I'm pretty alright about it.
hahahahahahahahahahahaha

Ruis is a weeboo.
Yea because Buddhism is exclusively Japanese.
Shinto is Japanese, tards

Buddhism is Chinese/Indian
2010-05-31 12:12:32
Wreckognize
Member
+294|6482

eleven bravo wrote:

prove that god doesnt exist
typical christian retort.  You're making the ridiculous nonsensical claims, so the burden of proof is on you.



Prove to me the eater bunny, santa claus, krishna, and the pink elephants that live on the dark side of the moon don't exist.
2010-05-31 12:13:50
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6402|North Carolina

Wreckognize wrote:

eleven bravo wrote:

prove that god doesnt exist
typical christian retort.  You're making the ridiculous nonsensical claims, so the burden of proof is on you.



Prove to me the eater bunny, santa claus, krishna, and the pink elephants that live on the dark side of the moon don't exist.
eleven is an atheist.  He's just using the same logic against ruis.

Granted, it is true that the burden of proof should be on belief rather than disbelief.
2010-05-31 12:21:05
Trotskygrad
бля
+354|5997|Vortex Ring State

Turquoise wrote:

Wreckognize wrote:

eleven bravo wrote:

prove that god doesnt exist
typical christian retort.  You're making the ridiculous nonsensical claims, so the burden of proof is on you.



Prove to me the eater bunny, santa claus, krishna, and the pink elephants that live on the dark side of the moon don't exist.
eleven is an atheist.  He's just using the same logic against ruis.

Granted, it is true that the burden of proof should be on belief rather than disbelief.
innocent until proven guilty eh?
2010-05-31 12:41:08
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6402|North Carolina

Trotskygrad wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Wreckognize wrote:


typical christian retort.  You're making the ridiculous nonsensical claims, so the burden of proof is on you.



Prove to me the eater bunny, santa claus, krishna, and the pink elephants that live on the dark side of the moon don't exist.
eleven is an atheist.  He's just using the same logic against ruis.

Granted, it is true that the burden of proof should be on belief rather than disbelief.
innocent until proven guilty eh?
Something like that...  It goes back to Russell's teapot, or more recently, the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
2010-05-31 12:47:11
DesertFox-
The very model of a modern major general
+794|6682|United States of America

Turquoise wrote:

Wreckognize wrote:

eleven bravo wrote:

prove that god doesnt exist
typical christian retort.  You're making the ridiculous nonsensical claims, so the burden of proof is on you.



Prove to me the eater bunny, santa claus, krishna, and the pink elephants that live on the dark side of the moon don't exist.
eleven is an atheist.  He's just using the same logic against ruis.

Granted, it is true that the burden of proof should be on belief rather than disbelief.
IMO burden of proof is on anyone making a claim either way, and both are impossible, so there's no point in making such a claim and people should keep it to themselves.

ruisleipa wrote:

DesertFox- wrote:

Neither side has proof, and the existence of any sort of God has so much emphasis placed on it nowadays that people act like somehow disproving the existence of a deity would render that belief system invalid when the idea of religion revolves around a hell of a lot more than just worshipping a deity.
but take away the deity and what are you left with?
The philosophical aspects of how religion interacts with life, ethics, and so on. It's far more intellectual than people credit (since they're so quick to dismiss them as sheeple). I used to have to go to weekly Catholic education sorts of classes which were really a waste of time because of the preschool types of "lessons". Most other kids goofed off, but I would sit and read my Bible. The classes had pretty feeble attempts to incorporate your religion with everyday life, and there was a bit of the "God is awesome" sort of things, which I didn't like. If there were to somehow be evidence that Jesus never existed or that there is no God, there's still a large amount of material to be studied in the catechism that isn't linked to the deity. It's somewhat similar to how a good number of the 10 Commandments are still relevant in a secular view.
2010-05-31 13:10:56
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6402|North Carolina

DesertFox- wrote:

IMO burden of proof is on anyone making a claim either way, and both are impossible, so there's no point in making such a claim and people should keep it to themselves.
Logically, that can't be true though.  Russell's teapot explains why.

Granted, I would agree with you that it's probably best for people to keep the dispute to themselves.

Obviously, I would require proof to believe in a deity -- of which there can't be any, and those who choose to believe in something without proof cannot be persuaded out of this belief through logic.  These are simply choices that individuals make for themselves.
2010-05-31 13:25:04
DesertFox-
The very model of a modern major general
+794|6682|United States of America
I doubt I would even know what any "proof" is if I were to witness it. Any physical proof would imply some sort of physical manifestation like the Greek gods interacting with humans, and that seems to be securely viewed as a myth anyway.
2010-05-31 17:24:59
Deadmonkiefart
Floccinaucinihilipilificator
+177|6703

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

^ He makes valid points about multiculturalism, and it shows a LOT of balls, but is the location completely necessary?
It shows a LOT of balls how, exactly?  We're not living in the 1930s here.  I think just about everyone would agree with what he said in regard to multiculturalism.
2010-05-31 17:44:51
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6769|PNW

Deadmonkiefart wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

^ He makes valid points about multiculturalism, and it shows a LOT of balls, but is the location completely necessary?
It shows a LOT of balls how, exactly?  We're not living in the 1930s here.  I think just about everyone would agree with what he said in regard to multiculturalism.
Yes, it shows a lot of balls building this thing right by one of the sites your religion's extremists had an orgy of violence at. Nothing wrong with showing some balls, but in this case it just seems a bit tasteless from my perspective.

Morpheus wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

^ He makes valid points about multiculturalism, and it shows a LOT of balls, but is the location completely necessary?
...tbh, where else are you going to find that fresh prime real-estate?


And, if we are agreeing with his points, what's wrong about the location?
That also came to mind, but I still think it would serve more as a reminder about Islamic involvement in 911 more than inducing greater acceptance of the faith.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2010-05-31 17:47:49)

2010-06-01 06:23:52
nlsme1
Member
+32|5415

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Deadmonkiefart wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

^ He makes valid points about multiculturalism, and it shows a LOT of balls, but is the location completely necessary?
It shows a LOT of balls how, exactly?  We're not living in the 1930s here.  I think just about everyone would agree with what he said in regard to multiculturalism.
Yes, it shows a lot of balls building this thing right by one of the sites your religion's extremists had an orgy of violence at. Nothing wrong with showing some balls, but in this case it just seems a bit tasteless from my perspective.

Morpheus wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

^ He makes valid points about multiculturalism, and it shows a LOT of balls, but is the location completely necessary?
...tbh, where else are you going to find that fresh prime real-estate?


And, if we are agreeing with his points, what's wrong about the location?
That also came to mind, but I still think it would serve more as a reminder about Islamic involvement in 911 more than inducing greater acceptance of the faith.
So a mosque 2 blocks away from ground zero is tasteless. How about the porn shop 2 blocks in the other direction?
2010-06-27 15:19:50
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6649|USA
2010-06-27 15:30:34
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6769|PNW

nlsme1 wrote:

So a mosque 2 blocks away from ground zero is tasteless. How about the porn shop 2 blocks in the other direction?
Bizarre comparison. As far as I know, pr0n hasn't really been associated with an attack like that. Two different animals.

As far as I'm concerned, it's not a question of can they, but should they.

Topic closed

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 … 39

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard