NATION

PASSWORD

Atheism vs. Christianity

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Western-Ukraine
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1164
Founded: Oct 27, 2014
Father Knows Best State

Postby Western-Ukraine » Fri Dec 05, 2014 10:01 am

The Borderline Borderlands wrote:
Western-Ukraine wrote:If no written words in books are proofs then how can you believe anything?


Through falsification. When a claim is made, examine the evidence.

Christianity makes myriad claims, claims that either have no evidence, or which are flat out contradicted by the evidence.

You'd be better off putting your faith in a broken clock. At least those are right on occasion.

Many of Christianitys claims can be explained by the many books of the bible.
Factbooks: National Politics
Region: U R N

Politics is a zero-sum game.

User avatar
Sociobiology
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18396
Founded: Aug 18, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Sociobiology » Fri Dec 05, 2014 10:10 am

Western-Ukraine wrote:
The Borderline Borderlands wrote:
Through falsification. When a claim is made, examine the evidence.

Christianity makes myriad claims, claims that either have no evidence, or which are flat out contradicted by the evidence.

You'd be better off putting your faith in a broken clock. At least those are right on occasion.

Many of Christianitys claims can be explained by the many books of the bible.

Just as the Norse can be explained by the Edda and the Hindu by the Vedas.
I think we risk becoming the best informed society that has ever died of ignorance. ~Reuben Blades

I got quite annoyed after the Haiti earthquake. A baby was taken from the wreckage and people said it was a miracle. It would have been a miracle had God stopped the earthquake. More wonderful was that a load of evolved monkeys got together to save the life of a child that wasn't theirs. ~Terry Pratchett

User avatar
The Borderline Borderlands
Attaché
 
Posts: 80
Founded: Nov 25, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby The Borderline Borderlands » Fri Dec 05, 2014 10:13 am

Western-Ukraine wrote:Many of Christianitys claims can be explained by the many books of the bible.


Like π = 3 or the world wide flood thing? Yeah, those are demonstrably wrong. Indeed your Holy Scripture is mostly wrong, and demonstrably so.

But hey, how about you provide some examples?

User avatar
Satanic Kittens
Secretary
 
Posts: 38
Founded: Jun 23, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Satanic Kittens » Fri Dec 05, 2014 10:15 am

Both are wrong. Satan created the universe while drunk.
All Hail Satan!

User avatar
The Universal World
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 7
Founded: Oct 09, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby The Universal World » Fri Dec 05, 2014 10:20 am

Honestly, I don't understand why there are even arguments between atheists and those who are religious. Atheists are the attackers of the argument, they demand physical evidence while religion is sheerly based off of faith. You cannot prove faith with something physical. Nor can you convince a bullheaded atheist who constantly attempting to prove a religious person (lets say Christian for example) wrong so he/she can feel better about him/herself and about his/her doubts everyday that they are attempting to cope with.

User avatar
Celritannia
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5198
Founded: Nov 10, 2010
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Celritannia » Fri Dec 05, 2014 10:23 am

Satanic Kittens wrote:Both are wrong. Satan created the universe while drunk.


Seems legit.

My DeviantArt
Obey
On Atheism
When you annoy a Celritannian
U W0T M8?
Zirkagrad wrote:A person with a penchant for flying lions with long tongues, could possibly be a fan of Kiss. Maybe the classiest nation with a lion with its tongue hanging out. Enjoys only the finest tea.
Citizen of Earth, Commonwealthian, European, British, Yorkshireman.
Atheist, Environmentalist, Pansexual, Left-Libertarian.

User avatar
The Union of Tentacles and Grapes
Diplomat
 
Posts: 787
Founded: Sep 22, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby The Union of Tentacles and Grapes » Fri Dec 05, 2014 10:31 am

The Universal World wrote:Honestly, I don't understand why there are even arguments between atheists and those who are religious. Atheists are the attackers of the argument, they demand physical evidence while religion is sheerly based off of faith. You cannot prove faith with something physical. Nor can you convince a bullheaded atheist who constantly attempting to prove a religious person (lets say Christian for example) wrong so he/she can feel better about him/herself and about his/her doubts everyday that they are attempting to cope with.

Because people do horribe things as a result of that faith-based approach to life. Atheism is not a view that can ever be construed as warranting murder, while the vast majority of religions make quite a few demands for murder.
Last edited by The Union of Tentacles and Grapes on Fri Dec 05, 2014 10:34 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
The Borderline Borderlands
Attaché
 
Posts: 80
Founded: Nov 25, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby The Borderline Borderlands » Fri Dec 05, 2014 10:32 am

The Universal World wrote:Honestly, I don't understand why there are even arguments between atheists and those who are religious. Atheists are the attackers of the argument, they demand physical evidence while religion is sheerly based off of faith. You cannot prove faith with something physical.


Hang on, what was it that Christian guy said? Oh right:

Western-Ukraine wrote:Christianity is absolutely better.


The Universal World wrote:Nor can you convince a bullheaded atheist who constantly attempting to prove a religious person (lets say Christian for example) wrong so he/she can feel better about him/herself and about his/her doubts everyday that they are attempting to cope with.


I'm not attempting to prove religious people wrong to feel better about myself. I'm opposed to the major world religions, because belief in those religions makes people do things I consider unethical.

That Christians happen to be wrong about their religion, I really don't care very much about. Sure it's sad they're deluding themselves. But that in itself is harmless to others.

User avatar
Pragia
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7190
Founded: May 08, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Pragia » Fri Dec 05, 2014 10:34 am

Risottia wrote:
Western-Ukraine wrote:I know those promises will be kept because of Jesus' sacrifice to save the humankind.

Now prove it. Prove that sacrifice actually happened. Prove that "saved humankind". No, written words in books aren't proof.

Huh, I guess books are unreliable

I'll focus more on "somebody told me" sources
In OOC call me Tom.
The Empire of Pretantia wrote:
Pragia wrote:And, let it be known that pretentias 2000th post was begging for mercy... From me.

What?! You asshole!

User avatar
The Union of Tentacles and Grapes
Diplomat
 
Posts: 787
Founded: Sep 22, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby The Union of Tentacles and Grapes » Fri Dec 05, 2014 10:39 am

Pragia wrote:
Risottia wrote:Now prove it. Prove that sacrifice actually happened. Prove that "saved humankind". No, written words in books aren't proof.

Huh, I guess books are unreliable

I'll focus more on "somebody told me" sources

And you totally strawmanned him. He is perectly correct: being in a book is no proof at all of accuracy. Evolution is not true because darwin wrote a book about it. It is true because the fact of its existance is demonstrated far beyond the burden of proof at every level of biochemistry, peloentology, archaeology, microbiology, taxonomy, etc.

Also: try not to bring up a book asserting a heliocentric universe in an attempt to demonstrate accuracy of books. If you were unaware, the universe is not heliocentric.

User avatar
Pragia
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7190
Founded: May 08, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Pragia » Fri Dec 05, 2014 10:45 am

The Union of Tentacles and Grapes wrote:
Pragia wrote:Huh, I guess books are unreliable

I'll focus more on "somebody told me" sources

And you totally strawmanned him. He is perectly correct: being in a book is no proof at all of accuracy. Evolution is not true because darwin wrote a book about it. It is true because the fact of its existance is demonstrated far beyond the burden of proof at every level of biochemistry, peloentology, archaeology, microbiology, taxonomy, etc.

Also: try not to bring up a book asserting a heliocentric universe in an attempt to demonstrate accuracy of books. If you were unaware, the universe is not heliocentric.

So would you say heliocentrism is more accurate than the terracentrism that was standard at the time?

Also, I already posted a series of proofs (sorry, wasn't on to defend it for too long, but the reply was addressed by another poster). Burden of proof lies in those making the claim against, or disproving the proofs brought in favor.
In OOC call me Tom.
The Empire of Pretantia wrote:
Pragia wrote:And, let it be known that pretentias 2000th post was begging for mercy... From me.

What?! You asshole!

User avatar
The Alma Mater
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 16790
Founded: May 23, 2004
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby The Alma Mater » Fri Dec 05, 2014 10:49 am

Western-Ukraine wrote:I know those promises will be kept because of Jesus' sacrifice to save the humankind.


What sacrifice would that be ? Being resurrected after 3 days, becoming immortal and the right hand man of the ruler of the universe, helping all your loved ones AND making sure you get worshipped for at least two thousand years in exchange for a standard execution seems like a pretty sweet deal to me.
Getting an education was a bit like a communicable sexual disease.
It made you unsuitable for a lot of jobs and then you had the urge to pass it on.
- Terry Pratchett, Hogfather

User avatar
The Union of Tentacles and Grapes
Diplomat
 
Posts: 787
Founded: Sep 22, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby The Union of Tentacles and Grapes » Fri Dec 05, 2014 10:50 am

Pragia wrote:
The Union of Tentacles and Grapes wrote:And you totally strawmanned him. He is perectly correct: being in a book is no proof at all of accuracy. Evolution is not true because darwin wrote a book about it. It is true because the fact of its existance is demonstrated far beyond the burden of proof at every level of biochemistry, peloentology, archaeology, microbiology, taxonomy, etc.

Also: try not to bring up a book asserting a heliocentric universe in an attempt to demonstrate accuracy of books. If you were unaware, the universe is not heliocentric.

So would you say heliocentrism is more accurate than the terracentrism that was standard at the time?

Also, I already posted a series of proofs (sorry, wasn't on to defend it for too long, but the reply was addressed by another poster). Burden of proof lies in those making the claim against, or disproving the proofs brought in favor.

"trivially less wildly inaccurate than the previous theory" isn't really a resounding support of heliocentrism.

I must have missed that post, but your assertions about burdens of proof are wrong. Your claims must be demonstrated, or they will be dismissed. I don't need to prove you wrong, you need to prove yourself to be correct. YOU are shifting the burden of proof.

User avatar
Tarsonis Survivors
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15693
Founded: Feb 03, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Tarsonis Survivors » Fri Dec 05, 2014 10:54 am

The Borderline Borderlands wrote:
Western-Ukraine wrote:Many of Christianitys claims can be explained by the many books of the bible.


Like π = 3 or the world wide flood thing? Yeah, those are demonstrably wrong. Indeed your Holy Scripture is mostly wrong, and demonstrably so.

But hey, how about you provide some examples?


Really people still think measurements of man made fountain, disprove the entire bible? How primitive.
Ecclesiastes 1:18 "For in much wisdom is much vexation, and those who increase knowledge increase sorrow"
Galatians 6:7 " Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow."
1 Corinthians 5:12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?
T. Stevens: "I don't hold with equality in all things, but I believe in equality under the Law."
James I of Aragon "Have you ever considered that our position is Idolatry to the Rabbi?"
A. Lincoln: "My concern is not whether God is on our side, My greatest concern is to be on God's side."
Debating Christian Theology with Non-Christians pretty much anybody be like

User avatar
The Union of Tentacles and Grapes
Diplomat
 
Posts: 787
Founded: Sep 22, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby The Union of Tentacles and Grapes » Fri Dec 05, 2014 10:59 am

Tarsonis Survivors wrote:
The Borderline Borderlands wrote:
Like π = 3 or the world wide flood thing? Yeah, those are demonstrably wrong. Indeed your Holy Scripture is mostly wrong, and demonstrably so.

But hey, how about you provide some examples?


Really people still think measurements of man made fountain, disprove the entire bible? How primitive.

That particular case is not actually correct. The real word used (in a book rewritten and translated multiple times over several centuries) is round, not circle.

The bible is still bullshit though. Talking snakes, giants, magic jews, bald magic jews that summon bears, etc.

User avatar
Pragia
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7190
Founded: May 08, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Pragia » Fri Dec 05, 2014 11:02 am

The Union of Tentacles and Grapes wrote:
Pragia wrote:So would you say heliocentrism is more accurate than the terracentrism that was standard at the time?

Also, I already posted a series of proofs (sorry, wasn't on to defend it for too long, but the reply was addressed by another poster). Burden of proof lies in those making the claim against, or disproving the proofs brought in favor.

"trivially less wildly inaccurate than the previous theory" isn't really a resounding support of heliocentrism.

I must have missed that post, but your assertions about burdens of proof are wrong. Your claims must be demonstrated, or they will be dismissed. I don't need to prove you wrong, you need to prove yourself to be correct. YOU are shifting the burden of proof.

I did prove myself correct. If someone wishes to challenge them, then they should have their own proof to the contrary or attack the proofs given. I am shifting the burden of proof, as I have already given mine.
In OOC call me Tom.
The Empire of Pretantia wrote:
Pragia wrote:And, let it be known that pretentias 2000th post was begging for mercy... From me.

What?! You asshole!

User avatar
The Rich Port
Post Czar
 
Posts: 35633
Founded: Jul 29, 2008
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby The Rich Port » Fri Dec 05, 2014 11:06 am

The Union of Tentacles and Grapes wrote:
Tarsonis Survivors wrote:
Really people still think measurements of man made fountain, disprove the entire bible? How primitive.

That particular case is not actually correct. The real word used (in a book rewritten and translated multiple times over several centuries) is round, not circle.

The bible is still bullshit though. Talking snakes, giants, magic jews, bald magic jews that summon bears, etc.


Giant trees, global floods, miracles, the fact God is apparently defeated by iron chariots...
LAUGH, AND GROW FAT
FIRE. IF IT TAKES YOU TO BURN.
FIRE. IF IT TAKES YOU TO LEARN.
FIRE. TO DESTROY ALL YOU'VE DONE.
FIRE. TO DESTROY ALL YOU'VE BECOME.
THOSE THAT SOW THORNS SHOULD NOT EXPECT FLOWERS.
YOU NEVER KNOW JUST HOW YOU LOOK THROUGH OTHER PEOPLE'S EYES.

Tracking | History | Factbook | Dharma
Economic Report | Regional Forum | Political Compass
CAPINTERN | OMSA | OZZY | PACT | APAC
Summary | Vanguard | The Book Of Sue
THE BILLION BIT BRONY
AHAHAHAHA PONY PONY PONY PONYYY


LOVEWHOYOUARE~


User avatar
The Rich Port
Post Czar
 
Posts: 35633
Founded: Jul 29, 2008
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby The Rich Port » Fri Dec 05, 2014 11:09 am

The Alma Mater wrote:
Western-Ukraine wrote:I know those promises will be kept because of Jesus' sacrifice to save the humankind.


What sacrifice would that be ? Being resurrected after 3 days, becoming immortal and the right hand man of the ruler of the universe, helping all your loved ones AND making sure you get worshipped for at least two thousand years in exchange for a standard execution seems like a pretty sweet deal to me.


As much as I think Jesus was a nice, if complex, guy, I think the fact people focus on the Passion just fucks Christianity right in the ass.

God knows how many millions of people before Jesus were murdered in such a horrible way and nobody gave a fuck about them.
LAUGH, AND GROW FAT
FIRE. IF IT TAKES YOU TO BURN.
FIRE. IF IT TAKES YOU TO LEARN.
FIRE. TO DESTROY ALL YOU'VE DONE.
FIRE. TO DESTROY ALL YOU'VE BECOME.
THOSE THAT SOW THORNS SHOULD NOT EXPECT FLOWERS.
YOU NEVER KNOW JUST HOW YOU LOOK THROUGH OTHER PEOPLE'S EYES.

Tracking | History | Factbook | Dharma
Economic Report | Regional Forum | Political Compass
CAPINTERN | OMSA | OZZY | PACT | APAC
Summary | Vanguard | The Book Of Sue
THE BILLION BIT BRONY
AHAHAHAHA PONY PONY PONY PONYYY


LOVEWHOYOUARE~


User avatar
The Union of Tentacles and Grapes
Diplomat
 
Posts: 787
Founded: Sep 22, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby The Union of Tentacles and Grapes » Fri Dec 05, 2014 11:15 am

Pragia wrote:
The Union of Tentacles and Grapes wrote:"trivially less wildly inaccurate than the previous theory" isn't really a resounding support of heliocentrism.

I must have missed that post, but your assertions about burdens of proof are wrong. Your claims must be demonstrated, or they will be dismissed. I don't need to prove you wrong, you need to prove yourself to be correct. YOU are shifting the burden of proof.

I did prove myself correct. If someone wishes to challenge them, then they should have their own proof to the contrary or attack the proofs given. I am shifting the burden of proof, as I have already given mine.

If you mean the aquinas arguments you posted, you demonstrated nothing. Those arguments are routinely dismantled by an 8 year old with a basic understanding of the form of a deductive argument. They prove nothing except a massive hole in your critical thinking skills when it comes to your particular imaginary friend.

But because I know you didn't actually read the whole wikipedia article, because all five arguments are quickly obliterated there, I will attempt to educate you on this matter myself. Probably fruitlessly.

Unmoved mover and first cause are identical fallacious arguments utilizing special pleading, false premises, and then follow it up with a conclusion which is logically impossible if the premises were even true(the all things have causes/movers premise). If all things require such a cause, god requires a cause. All of the failure.
argument from contingency and degree are also virtually the same. False premises, nonsense categorizations, and special pleading to make the perfect/infinite thing god rather than a perfect ham sandwitch or an infinitely long nose hair.
The telelogical argument has not a single correct premise AND an invalid conclusion even if the premises were true, relying on special pleading like the others to assert that god must exist because(no explanation provided...).

You want to try making your own arguments, preferably ones that are not composed ENTIRELY of fallacy and bullshit?

User avatar
Pragia
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7190
Founded: May 08, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Pragia » Fri Dec 05, 2014 11:43 am

The Union of Tentacles and Grapes wrote:
Pragia wrote:I did prove myself correct. If someone wishes to challenge them, then they should have their own proof to the contrary or attack the proofs given. I am shifting the burden of proof, as I have already given mine.

If you mean the aquinas arguments you posted, you demonstrated nothing. Those arguments are routinely dismantled by an 8 year old with a basic understanding of the form of a deductive argument. They prove nothing except a massive hole in your critical thinking skills when it comes to your particular imaginary friend.

But because I know you didn't actually read the whole wikipedia article, because all five arguments are quickly obliterated there, I will attempt to educate you on this matter myself. Probably fruitlessly.

Unmoved mover and first cause are identical fallacious arguments utilizing special pleading, false premises, and then follow it up with a conclusion which is logically impossible if the premises were even true(the all things have causes/movers premise). If all things require such a cause, god requires a cause. All of the failure.
argument from contingency and degree are also virtually the same. False premises, nonsense categorizations, and special pleading to make the perfect/infinite thing god rather than a perfect ham sandwitch or an infinitely long nose hair.
The telelogical argument has not a single correct premise AND an invalid conclusion even if the premises were true, relying on special pleading like the others to assert that god must exist because(no explanation provided...).

You want to try making your own arguments, preferably ones that are not composed ENTIRELY of fallacy and bullshit?

Obviously you didn't read the article because the arguments against are picked apart right afterwards

1-2. The whole point of it flew way over your head didn't it? Are things not caused by other things? The idea is that there must be an original cause/motion, and the point is that there must be at least one exception to the rule. Special pleading requires that the idea of a string of causes and motions be proven false. I post this comment because you posted yours, you posted yours in response to mine, etc.
3. Contingency and degree are not at all alike, if anything contingency is closer to cause and motion. Is the idea of all things requiring one another to exist false? Does the candles light exist without the candle? No, it does not.
4. Idea of Perfection=/=physically infinitely long nose hair. You also missed the point that Aquinas uses the Christian God as a placeholder, it is not special pleading to give something a name.
5. Tell me more about how things do not do things with result, how rocks are intelligent, and how acting towards a goal is not intelligence.
In OOC call me Tom.
The Empire of Pretantia wrote:
Pragia wrote:And, let it be known that pretentias 2000th post was begging for mercy... From me.

What?! You asshole!

User avatar
Menassa
Post Czar
 
Posts: 33354
Founded: Aug 11, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Menassa » Fri Dec 05, 2014 11:57 am

Tarsonis Survivors wrote:
The Borderline Borderlands wrote:
Like π = 3 or the world wide flood thing? Yeah, those are demonstrably wrong. Indeed your Holy Scripture is mostly wrong, and demonstrably so.

But hey, how about you provide some examples?


Really people still think measurements of man made fountain, disprove the entire bible? How primitive.

#handbreadths
-NS's one and only Tanna!
Radical Monotheist
Their hollow inheritance.
This is my god and I shall exalt him
The NS Steam Thread
Jewish Discussion Thread בְּ
"A missionary uses the Bible like a drunk uses a lamppost, not so much for illumination, but for support"
"Imagine of a bunch of Zulu tribesmen told Congress how to read the Constitution, that's how it feels to a Jew when you tell us how to read our bible"
"God said: you must teach, as I taught, without a fee."
"Against your will you are formed, against your will you are born, against your will you live, against your will you die, and against your will you are destined to give a judgement and accounting before the king, king of all kings..."

User avatar
The Union of Tentacles and Grapes
Diplomat
 
Posts: 787
Founded: Sep 22, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby The Union of Tentacles and Grapes » Fri Dec 05, 2014 12:57 pm

Pragia wrote:
The Union of Tentacles and Grapes wrote:If you mean the aquinas arguments you posted, you demonstrated nothing. Those arguments are routinely dismantled by an 8 year old with a basic understanding of the form of a deductive argument. They prove nothing except a massive hole in your critical thinking skills when it comes to your particular imaginary friend.

But because I know you didn't actually read the whole wikipedia article, because all five arguments are quickly obliterated there, I will attempt to educate you on this matter myself. Probably fruitlessly.

Unmoved mover and first cause are identical fallacious arguments utilizing special pleading, false premises, and then follow it up with a conclusion which is logically impossible if the premises were even true(the all things have causes/movers premise). If all things require such a cause, god requires a cause. All of the failure.
argument from contingency and degree are also virtually the same. False premises, nonsense categorizations, and special pleading to make the perfect/infinite thing god rather than a perfect ham sandwitch or an infinitely long nose hair.
The telelogical argument has not a single correct premise AND an invalid conclusion even if the premises were true, relying on special pleading like the others to assert that god must exist because(no explanation provided...).

You want to try making your own arguments, preferably ones that are not composed ENTIRELY of fallacy and bullshit?

Obviously you didn't read the article because the arguments against are picked apart right afterwards

1-2. The whole point of it flew way over your head didn't it? Are things not caused by other things? The idea is that there must be an original cause/motion, and the point is that there must be at least one exception to the rule. Special pleading requires that the idea of a string of causes and motions be proven false. I post this comment because you posted yours, you posted yours in response to mine, etc.
3. Contingency and degree are not at all alike, if anything contingency is closer to cause and motion. Is the idea of all things requiring one another to exist false? Does the candles light exist without the candle? No, it does not.
4. Idea of Perfection=/=physically infinitely long nose hair. You also missed the point that Aquinas uses the Christian God as a placeholder, it is not special pleading to give something a name.
5. Tell me more about how things do not do things with result, how rocks are intelligent, and how acting towards a goal is not intelligence.

First bold: that is the definition of special pleading. Special pleading is a fallacy and renders any argument that contains it an invalid argument. If you don't special plead your god out of obeying your own premises, your conclusion is disproven by your premises.

3. They are nearly identical. They both assert that all things are X, that the existence of X requires that there exist a thing which is either perfect in trait X or infinite. Yes, the idea of all things requiring one another to exist is totally false. MLKJ died and the universe didn't stop existing. Your tautology about candles doesn't follow and doesn't seem to do anything.

4. the argument from contingency asserts(on an invalid argument with no true premises) that an infinite thing exists. It doesn't even attempt to show that it should be any particular thing, so it demonstrates the existence of an infinitely orgasmic dildo just as much as it demonstrates anything else. Which is not at all. the argument from degree is the same, but replace infinitely organismic dildo with perfectly proportioned thigh gap and ass. The arguments don't make any less sense. And if god is a placeholder, I demand that in ANY further use of his argument you must use the following in place of any stance god: [god, who feasts upon genital secretions]. Since it doesn't change the arguments, you should be fine with that. Right?

5. "All natural bodies in the world act towards ends." If you think that rocks act towards ends, you are an idiot. False premise.
"These objects are in themselves unintelligent." If you think that humans are unintelligent(or are somehow not natural?) you are an idiot. False premise.
"Acting towards an end is a characteristic of intelligence." So, If I make a small lego robot which folds paper in half, I have created an artificial intelligence, if this premise is true. Good thing that it's bullshit!
All three premises are false.
The conclusion is invalid because, even if all things acted towards ends and acts towards ends require intelligence, that could be explained by any arbitrary(or infinite) number of intelligences inherent in those things. It just special pleads that there has to be one intelligence doing all of it, then of course follows it up with the useless waste of words that is declaring the name of this unjustified thing that is invalidly concluded to exist.

Again: try some arguments that are not over 700 year old bullshit and fallacy stew.
Last edited by The Union of Tentacles and Grapes on Fri Dec 05, 2014 1:01 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Benuty
Post Czar
 
Posts: 35769
Founded: Jan 21, 2013
Democratic Socialists

Postby Benuty » Fri Dec 05, 2014 1:53 pm

Western-Ukraine wrote:
The Borderline Borderlands wrote:
Through falsification. When a claim is made, examine the evidence.

Christianity makes myriad claims, claims that either have no evidence, or which are flat out contradicted by the evidence.

You'd be better off putting your faith in a broken clock. At least those are right on occasion.

Many of Christianitys claims can be explained by the many books of the bible.

Like how there is no prophecy of a "virgin" Mary?
Last edited by Hashem 13.8 billion years ago
King of Madness in the Right Wing Discussion Thread. Winner of 2016 Posters Award for Insanity.
Please be aware my posts in NSG, and P2TM are separate.

User avatar
Benuty
Post Czar
 
Posts: 35769
Founded: Jan 21, 2013
Democratic Socialists

Postby Benuty » Fri Dec 05, 2014 1:54 pm

The Rich Port wrote:
The Union of Tentacles and Grapes wrote:That particular case is not actually correct. The real word used (in a book rewritten and translated multiple times over several centuries) is round, not circle.

The bible is still bullshit though. Talking snakes, giants, magic jews, bald magic jews that summon bears, etc.


Giant trees, global floods, miracles, the fact God is apparently defeated by iron chariots...

Which is hardly relevant.

Ergo *Insert ex-Bishop John Spong clip here*.
Last edited by Benuty on Fri Dec 05, 2014 1:57 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Last edited by Hashem 13.8 billion years ago
King of Madness in the Right Wing Discussion Thread. Winner of 2016 Posters Award for Insanity.
Please be aware my posts in NSG, and P2TM are separate.

User avatar
Coreyea
Envoy
 
Posts: 314
Founded: Sep 06, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Coreyea » Fri Dec 05, 2014 1:55 pm

Christianity, ALLLL DAY, Blood, reppin' my niggas.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 5 kingdoms of Britannia, Andsed, Cekoviu, Crockerland, Dazchan, Demirestad, Estanglia, Fartsniffage, Greater Miami Shores, Ifreann, Immoren, Kenmoria, Kowani, Lykens, Mulvaia, Nakena, Necroghastia, New Terabithia, Novus America, Proctopeo, Saiwania, Scomagia, The Blaatschapen, The Chuck, The Greater Ohio Valley, Torrocca, United Muscovite Nations, United New England, Valrifell, Washington Resistance Army

Advertisement

Remove ads