Summations Only

This obviously is nowhere close to being true.

I see christianity has not progressed at all from its roots as a mystery religion. Just listen to you and you will introduce me to the secrets of your god. No thanks.If I listened to every proselytizing nut job that said they had the secret to a god I would have to follow hundreds of different beliefs.The audacity and hubris that people like you believe you have the secret is absolutely astounding.Your analogy is so inaccurate and ridiculous it is laughable. I can see water, I can taste it and feel it. I know what water does to me when I am thirsty. I can feel thirst and know what alleviates it. Your god, pitiful as it is, does none of this. Water is essential to life, a god is essential to nothing.

So as support for your argument you post links to pages you haven't even read? You wonder why we berate you?Wow!

Before you start accusing people of fallacies you need to understand the fallacy. This was neither a slippery slope or an appeal to consequences. Try wikipedia for a description of each. I was using a rhetorical device to show that there are hundred(actually thousands or more) different beliefs that claim there own special version of a god. Do you deny the existence of multitudes of different beliefs? Not at all, since truth is by definition a subjective thing. For people to push their personal truths audacity fits, so does hubris. What a mess this is. First you say I am venting my morality in then in the next breath tell me I have no morals. First of all fuck you. Secondly, you have been shown many times that claiming atheism does not allow for morals is a lie. What kind of fallacy is that? You seem very keen on accusing people of using fallacy but unable to actually address any points that are brought up. A regular Gish Gallop. Oh yes atheists actually believe in god they are just mad at him. OK maybe I need to go slow for you. That was another rhetorical device. I won't waste my time trying to explain it to you. So you respond to with personal attacks because I criticized someones belief in some god somewhere. How christian of you. Still waiting for that evidence.Edited by Theodoric, : No reason given.

So why the need for such hubris when speaking of a personal truth? Why the need for others to experience your personal truth?There is no ultimate truth after all? Seems quite a change from your rant at me just prior to this.

I find it absolutely hilarious when someone runs on about fallacies and then commits one them self. As a matter of fact you just accused equivocation on another thread(but I don't believe it was equivocation) Now you commit an equivocation here. Gravity being true is a different meaning than ultimate truth. But then again you know that don't you. Yet you know nothing about me do you. If we were judging morality that way I would assume your were an amoral person. Lying for jesus is lying all the same. Oh yeah, I just refuse to drink the kool aid so it is my fault. As I said if you have evidence present it.The rest of your post is just self aggrandizing crap

Selectively reading again?from the wiki article you linked to.

quote:

---

In logic, appeal to consequences refers only to arguments that assert a conclusion's truth value (true or false) without regard to the formal preservation of the truth from the premises; appeal to consequences does not refer to arguments that address a premise's consequential desirability (good or bad, or right or wrong) instead of its truth value. Therefore, an argument based on appeal to consequences is valid in long-term decision making (which discusses possibilities that do not exist yet in the present) and abstract ethics, and in fact such arguments are the cornerstones of many moral theories, particularly related to consequentialism.

---

But I wasn't using it like that either. As I said I used it as a rhetorical device to show that there are thousands of different beliefs in thousands of different gods. I asked before but of course you ignored it so I will ask again.
Do you deny the existence of multitudes of different beliefs in different gods?

I have had enough of your gish gallop and manipulating of words and terms. I will stick to conversing with honest debaters.Good day sir!ABE
BTW I don't sin. No such thing.Edited by Theodoric, : No reason given.

Mikey you can believe anything you want and from your posts it does seem you believe anything you want. Just because people get tired of your crap and dishonesty does not mean that they concede you are correct or that you won anything. But if that is what you need to think in order to massage your ego, by all means go with it.
Btw, didn't you say something about the sin of pride? I guess moral relativity continues to be a problem with self-righteous, smug religious types.Just because I don't believe in sin does not mean I don't believe in or have morals. I will put my morals up against anyone's any day of the week. You sure are good at misrepresenting what people say. Some people would call that a form of a lie. Are you equivocating the word sin? You seem to have a problem with equivocating and understanding what the word means. If you are going to quote someone you should actually quote what they say not make up something. Because that would be dishonest and some people would think it was a lie. I did not say what you have in quotations. Are you lying?Lets look at how you used the word originally. You are using it in a religious context.
Dictionary definition "transgression of divine law:"
As there is no define law there is no such thing as sin.Another definition is any reprehensible or regrettable action, behavior, lapse, etc.; great fault or offense: Of course I do. We all do in context of the society we are part of. Everyone picks and chooses their moral system. Thank you for making my point. Your claims of some sort of god driven truth seems to be debunked by you own argument. Not sure what the point you were trying to make with these two sentences, but I don't see how they support any of your arguments. Obviously. To ridiculous to warrant a response. I do not have to justify my behavior. I feel no need to apologize for responding to attacks on my belief system.Remember you are the one that jumped in on my response to Phat with. Message 559
This is incorrect and insulting. You have contributed enough on this forum that you know that this is not a correct representation of atheism. That you would continue to state this makes me believe your are misrepresenting reality on purpose. You are more than willing to attack others beliefs but find offense at perceived attacks on your own. That IS very christian of you.

Not really. Mostly christian lies.
International Dictionary of Historic Places: Southern Europe - Google Books
"The Myth of Persecution": Early Christians weren't persecuted | Salon.comI mean if you can actually find evidence by all means present it.What is your evidence Nero even knew anything about christians?ABE
See myth #3
http://www.cracked.com/...e-about-ancient-civilizations.htmlEdited by Theodoric, : No reason given.

So is that one of the parts of your bible you don't believe?

Or maybe someone came up with a story years later about a guy that rode a donkey(actually it is a very muddled story that had him riding two donkeys)so that it could be said he fulfilled scripture. As there is no evidence that would probably be the most likely.

Did you read the paper?

Your evidence? Also who was John? Care to provide biographical information?

And this is why I have such little respect for you. You think those who do not believe what you do are the enemy. I do not think of you as an enemy. There is no war between us, but alas you and the other fundies feel there is a war and will not be satisfied until non-believers, and those that believe differently, are utterly and totally defeated.It is a pity you and your ilk feel this way. It makes it difficult for all us to live harmoniously.