Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9038 total)
586 online now:
Aussie, PaulK, Stile (3 members, 583 visitors)
Newest Member: Barry Deaborough
Post Volume: Total: 885,669 Year: 3,315/14,102 Month: 256/724 Week: 14/91 Day: 2/12 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Anti-theist
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4718
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 49 of 464 (883952)
01-19-2021 5:17 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by AZPaul3
01-14-2021 2:14 PM


AZPaul3 writes:

The intent is to provide a playground more amenable to directly insulting and rubbing societies nose in the stupidity of their theisms

As long as you realise this could never be aimed at any specific religious person anyway for if there is a general "stupidity" to "theisms" (as you specifically mention the plural) then because so many of the "theisms" are basically mutually exclusive then an example of that stupidity may only belong to certain "theisms" but not others.

It's kind of like if you look at the stat for atheists generally being smarter than, "religious" people, as a way of then implying that Dan the theist must surely then be stupid compared to Pete the atheist. But in fact Dan having a higher IQ is not precluded and would not contradict the general stat anyway.

Conclusion; even if you presented things against religious people and called it stupidity, it wouldn't follow that any specific religious person could be included in that evaluation anyway.

I shall try and explain it for you; You see if you are going to say there is something, "stupid" with believing in Thor and you explain that particular stupid thing, the problem is going to be since that is a different god to mine it can't really say anything about me anyway. Nor could it say anything about someone that worships nature for example.

In other words logically it is PROVABLE that there can be many stupid things about "theisms", none of which apply to believing in the Lord, for obviously if the Lord exists many theisms don't, perhaps 99.9999% of them and if they are mostly false then it follows they are inventions and if they are inventions mostly then it follows that we expect a lot of stupidity from the atheists of the real God you would term, "theists" or, "religionists."

Of course, "stupidity" is question-begged.

So ironically the stupidity of false theisms is actually atheist to the real God so those stupidities are actually atheist in terms of a Christian perspective because from our perspective you either are born again and have the spirit of God or you do not.
That means Buddhists, Muslims and atheists are all equally non-believers from the perspective of the bible

AZPaul3 writes:

religionists

What's that?

It's just an invented atheistic-word that only has meaning to atheists.

Like when on atheist-day an atheist gave a talk about God not answering emails. He seemed to think that God was head over all religion and should answer all prayers and generally isn't.

This is rather problematic given for example, the Lord God of the bible, never said He would answer prayers in this way.

So what is a "religionist" anyway?

You can be, "religious" and be a Pagan that believes crystals can heal.

ANSWER: The atheist creates "religionist" and uses, "religion" broadly, and won't specifically call you a, "Christian" for a very obvious reason of propaganda. That reason is that if you describe me and define me specifically then you cannot call me a "pig" if you call me a "human."

But if you use a BROAD epithet such as, "mammal", now you can associate me with filthy pigs.

So your plan is essentially transparent propaganda, you ARE IN LOVE with the broad term of, "religion" because then Christians can be associated with things on the broad spectrum of, "religion" and you can make us LOOK stupid for things we don't even do nor believe.

So basically the use of a BROAD brush helps you to present ALL people that are, "theist" as stupid but the chances are they either aren't stupid for those things you present like a human isn't a pig just because you call us, "mammal", or the "stupidity" is question-begged only being your own unqualified subjective opinion.

For every nasty person like you are there are probably ten nice agnostics that wouldn't see what you see.

"You see - for every shi* there's six nice people." - Jonathan Mardukas - (from) "The Midnight Run."


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by AZPaul3, posted 01-14-2021 2:14 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by Tangle, posted 01-19-2021 5:26 PM mike the wiz has responded
 Message 52 by Taq, posted 01-19-2021 5:28 PM mike the wiz has responded
 Message 65 by AZPaul3, posted 01-19-2021 7:46 PM mike the wiz has not yet responded
 Message 69 by Stile, posted 01-20-2021 3:51 PM mike the wiz has not yet responded

  
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4718
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 51 of 464 (883954)
01-19-2021 5:27 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by Tangle
01-19-2021 5:26 PM


Tangle writes:

Hey Mike, let's not ignore the intelligent idiots.
Those that use their corrupted intelligence to create false arguments capable of deluding the truly stupid.

I promise I won't forget you. Only why did you call yourself "intelligent"? That's the only part I disagree with.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by Tangle, posted 01-19-2021 5:26 PM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by Tangle, posted 01-19-2021 5:34 PM mike the wiz has responded

  
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4718
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 54 of 464 (883957)
01-19-2021 5:46 PM


I'd like to say one more general comment, just pertaining to this whole issue of theism and atheism.

For those who really do care about rational thinking, here's some things to consider.

First of all with, "religion", the problem is how broad the term is.

By analogy, if you are say described as a snake, and I can only say things about snakes, I can't really associate you with dirty rats or filthy pigs. But if you are described as a, "mammal", because the term is BROADER you can then ASSOCIATE me with those things.

So with religion all you really have to do is find an example of a silly argument or somethins obviously stupid, then associate me with it.

In terms of the term, "atheist" that's an inherently advantageous descriptor. But that's not for any clever thing you have done as an atheist. No, you are simply presented with a more advantageous position because you cannot be associated with any other beliefs.

HOWEVER, if materialism is ultimately false like say Islan or the Greek gods or Thor or whatever then obviously we would put "atheism" on the list under, "fiction".

So then materialism/atheism is NOT religion, yes, BUT that doesn't stop it being fiction.

So think about it, if atheism is ultimately false then it is a sort of science-fiction alongside religious fictions. Sort of like your DVD collection might contain fictional drama, science fiction, supernatural fiction, fantasy fiction, etc....

CONCLUSION: Really it's all semantics. What most atheists aren't smart enough to know they are doing is called an ASSOCIATION FALLACY.

What you do is you LUMP people into two categories, and you basically venerate and exalt one category (atheism) and in the other group you LUMP all of the negative traits.

You then lump people into one of the two groups and exalt your own group.

To be honest Watson, I could read this book with my eyes wide shut.

I can only hope the simple are not led astray by such propaganda.

CONCLUSION: Ultimately the case for atheism from atheists like the anti-Christians here is a silent case. There is nothing really convincing about atheism or any solid arguments for it as such other than the philosophical problem of evil and suffering so basically it's just to attack religious people. That's essentially your case but "stupidity" here isn't really defined as low IQ it seems it is defined more as what the atheists deem absurd.

But then surely you know that if you claim in an atheist universe all such opinions are relative and subjective then that type of, "stupidity" is only true for those that deem it stupid or absurd? For example it is absurd to me to believe the most clearly intelligent designs ever created ultimately created themselves against all of the induction of evidence which shows advanced specified complexity only always has a designer as a cause. It's absurd to believe that humans wouldn't be made in God's image yet are clearly different from the animals in being sentient persons, and we can also design and create like God. It is also stupid to believe evolution happened where it's transitional history is absent by more than 99.9% and believe the small percentage are really transitionals when it's obvious they are simply a case of mistaken identity, a false appearance of evolution. It is stupid to believe all religious believers are stupid and all atheists are brilliant and correct and knowledgeable.

That's stupid by definition, human traits will always be ubiquitous no matter what the groupings are and arguably a lot of atheism is stupider than theism.

SO ultimately the overall impression I get is one of, "I hate religion, specifically Christians but I will call them religionists as it gives me the ability to tar them all with the same brush."


Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by Taq, posted 01-19-2021 5:58 PM mike the wiz has not yet responded
 Message 58 by Tangle, posted 01-19-2021 6:01 PM mike the wiz has responded
 Message 68 by Phat, posted 01-20-2021 3:11 AM mike the wiz has not yet responded
 Message 70 by Stile, posted 01-21-2021 9:56 AM mike the wiz has not yet responded

  
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4718
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 55 of 464 (883959)
01-19-2021 5:55 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by Taq
01-19-2021 5:28 PM


Taq writes:

I know some really smart people, and some of them believe in stupid things. For example, I know a really good infectious disease doctor who also believes in the healing power of magnets. Really smart guy, but believes in some really stupid BS..

(edited to fix this quote)

I appreciate that. But the problem is what group are you? If you are asking me to believe intelligent people are idiots and you I believe would consider yourself intelligent, why is it that you are not considered an idiot? So essentially you IMPLY that I am an intelligent idiot. But how do you know you are not an idiot for believing a homochiral polymer of amino acids could avoid hydrolysis somehow, and create itself into a folding protein over time and get together with some other pals such as the organelles in a cell and machinery, and become a cell.
(AHHHHH I can hear the cogs working, you are thinking of saying that organelles come much later on with eukaryotes, but ultimately you know what I really mean, I mean that it isn't really a realistic scenario no matter how, "science" you try and make it sound.)

Explain what specific thing counts as, "idiotic". That seems like a relative thing. Admit it, it really is only the "below the belt" level of debate that gets us calling each other idiots for what we believe.
There is also the problem of the inherently amazing/fantastic/absurd.
How do you know it is not really idiotic but in fact just fantastic because it is not mundane?
For example would anyone really believe the giant squid was anything more than something from a monster movie had it not been found? So then in a way nobody can escape the fantastic.
What I mean is, if we evolved from slime, that's FANTASTIC. That would mean all the usual signs of ID that would take intelligence beyond our own wasn't needed. Even if the whole thing was natural it would be FANTASTIC. So would God creating us, it would be FANTASTIC if a supernatural God exists as a person and really created us.

Tar writes:

We are all quite sure that you can only show us one birth certificate for yourself, and many of us still think is rather interesting that people believe they have a spirit that lives within their body. From where we sit, the only reason you think your religious beliefs are different from others is that you belong to that one religion.

What then shall we judge pertaining to your, "from where we sit" comment?

For example there are in prison a small percentage of innocent people. "From where the jury sat" they were guilty yet the innocent know they are innocent.

Yes, sat in their cell the innocent "still" know they are innocent.

So you are missing the problem of epistemology. What can be known. With atheism how can you not conflate genuine ignorance with the negative? For example if wwe are right and the Lord does exist and His spirit is in us, we do have eternal life, have experienced the miraculous etc.....how can you know that your own perspective of looking at it and thinking it ridiculous is actually not a symptom of your own personal ignorance?

Edited by mike the wiz, : No reason given.

Edited by mike the wiz, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Taq, posted 01-19-2021 5:28 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by Taq, posted 01-19-2021 6:03 PM mike the wiz has responded
 Message 71 by Stile, posted 01-21-2021 10:05 AM mike the wiz has not yet responded

  
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4718
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 57 of 464 (883961)
01-19-2021 5:59 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by Tangle
01-19-2021 5:34 PM


Tangle writes:

Unlike you Mike, I'm actually a christian, I give you the benefit of being intelligent but ignorant. It's not your fault that your intelligence is corrupted by the virus of religion.
I'm afraid there's no hope for you but luckily we have a vaccine called education that will help your offspring but sadly not you.

Meanwhile, you'll be fine don't worry.

As usual, there can be no rational, reasonable discourse with you. You're just a troll, and you're satisfied to be one.

yes, I am the ultimate false Christian to you, for actually believing God created life and the universe. That sure makes me one evil atheist, Tangle.

Once again we can only be astounded by your intellectual prowess.

BUT, I claim a conditional implication;
"If you were truly in Christ, you wouldn't behave as you do towards me as those with the love of God don't behave that way towards me."

You do behave that way, therefore reasonably you are not in Christ. (modus tollens)......


This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Tangle, posted 01-19-2021 5:34 PM Tangle has not yet responded

  
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4718
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 60 of 464 (883964)
01-19-2021 6:10 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by Tangle
01-19-2021 6:01 PM


Tangle writes:

You don't half talk some bollocks Mike.
You impress yourself, but you're here, not on your home evangelical turf. Here you have to present real arguments, real logic, real fact not the half-baked, corrupted nonsense you peddle elsewhere.

Give us some honest argument Mike. let's see if you can do it.

A self-defeating post in that your post is actually the one that didn't contain any argument, just some barely asserted accusations.

As usual I will not get into the insulting-game with you, I will just let you have enough rope to..................you can guess the rest.

You see I am not insecure, which is why I don't need to insult. When you say things like "bollocks" you NAME what I said bollocks for the real reason that you don't have any answer to it. So naturally your CRUDE response is to lash out defensively.

Please address what I said. I know Christians in Christ personally and we have the love of God and they don't behave like you do so I see your behaviour as evidence you are not a Christian according to that conditional implication.

SO then the implication had an antecedent and consequent that reasonably followed. How is it, "bollocks".

It's okay I know you have no answer, because you don't even know what a conditional implication is do you Tangle?

Tangle writes:

You impress yourself

I do but not for the reasons you think. I suffer mostly from the OTHER less well known side of the Dunning-Kruger effect. If I walk into a room with an exam I will assume I will fail and be last on the test and I assume others have abilities I don't have. Mostly because of a learning difficulty which gives me a sort of DAZZLEMENT when presented with new information, for about a minute or so, I am blind.

So when evolutionists tell me I am an ignorant idiot and I go and score 90% on logic and science tests or more, or solve difficult riddles I thought were beyond me it isn't so much I am impressed I am more surprised by that.

So no, in terms of the self-impressed conclusion you jump to you confuse that with a love of correctness.

I am not generally correct for the purpose of annoying evolutionists, I am simply a person that is frequently correct whereas most people are frequently incorrect.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by Tangle, posted 01-19-2021 6:01 PM Tangle has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by Stile, posted 01-21-2021 10:10 AM mike the wiz has not yet responded

  
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4718
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 61 of 464 (883965)
01-19-2021 6:18 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by Taq
01-19-2021 6:03 PM


None-answer really. You DESIRE to be intellectual but are stopped and revert back to the "we" crap, as though majority decides something. But your assertions don't prove a thing, you just believe they do because you are, and I quote, "fallible" but have told yourself you are superior being in the non-Christian group.

Taq writes:

Because I see it happening all of the time in cell culture.

Oh Taq, you surely know you are only fooling yourself by stating this inaccurate thing.

In experiments to replicate abiogenesis or try and see even the most basic building blocks arise naturally there is no such example. You refer to the programming of actually complete living cells designed and in place on totalum.

Not at all the same thing.

Taq writes:

Has anyone seen God's body wash up on shore?

Have the bodies of the brothers that escaped Alcatraz been found washed up on shore?

The thing about evidence is you have to make sure it would follow. With your example it's an example of an argument called a RIGGED DICE. You use and abuse hindsight to think of a piece of evidence for God existing full well knowing it doesn't exist, then you request that particular piece of evidence. (asking for me to score through a goal hoop that can't be scored through physically)

Atheists being, "fallible" never seem to notice this biased game they are playing.

Taq writes:

Again, we think it is entertaining when you think you can prove yourself right by simply proclaiming yourself to be right.

You can collectively agree that is what I am doing as an argumentum ad populum fallacy but you haven't shown how I am wrong in anyway whatsoever by barely asserting that I am only proclaiming myself to be right.

I provided reasonings and arguments as to why I am right. Ironically those, "fallible biases" won't seem to allow you to see that ironically it is you that is proclaiming your group to be right with a bare assertion fallacy about what you say I am doing.

Is it a good sign that you can lie to yourself in this way? I don't think so. I offered up rational discourse and you closed down pretty quickly and got the bare-assertion gun out when you didn't really have any answers.

Edited by mike the wiz, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Taq, posted 01-19-2021 6:03 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by Taq, posted 01-19-2021 6:49 PM mike the wiz has not yet responded

  
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4718
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 63 of 464 (883967)
01-19-2021 6:49 PM


So this was an easy win. Basically I answered all posts and didn't get any proper answers back, nobody addressed anything.

Something to think about isn't it? That one creationist, that evil "religious idiot" you think me, can turn up for one hour and get the checkmate EASILY, which any honest person can read and clearly see.

Did I insult? No. Did I assert? No. Was I hostile? No.

Did I as a, "religionist" have any problems at all refuting the superior atheists? Not in the least.

It should be a lesson but likely won't be, it will just be eggs and tomatoes on my way out the door.

How sad that a once alive-forum has become a den of vipers. Why I logged in I'll never know, there is nothing more INTRANSIGENT and inflexible as a dedicated anti-theist.

I had hoped there may be one or two reasonable ones I could just discuss those things with, Taq sort of started well but clammed up real quick once he found out I had answers.

Wasn't it Einstein that said to expect a different result when doing the same thing again and again is the definition of insanity?

Why do you always assume I won't have answers when you know my abilities? It's bizarre, you are like that bear that rocks back and forth in it's cage because it's been locked up for so long.

The real reason I always win is because it is really God's wisdom in me. It isn't me, it's what God has done in me. God will show that Him and one person are a majority, that is the power of His wisdom. You cannot defeat the one that designed all of the lifeforms when you can't come anywhere near that level of designer intelligence.

Me myself in and of myself I am nothing, but the knowledge and wisdom of God? Not one man on earth can win against it.

Deep down you liars must surely see it. It is a shame you only can see me, and not the one that is really refuting you. Even now the Lord would accept humility if you looked into His words and found Him with a humble heart and admitted like me you are just a bit of sinful flesh.

I wish your all well. (Despite the barrage of insults you always throw at me every time I come here. Lol)


Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by Taq, posted 01-19-2021 6:53 PM mike the wiz has not yet responded
 Message 66 by anglagard, posted 01-19-2021 9:10 PM mike the wiz has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021