₦airaland Forum

thehomer: You have things backwards. Natural laws are our representation of the processes. How do you know the laws of nature can physically be different?

Considering that I never said anything about physical differences, perhaps you should explain what you mean by the phrase "physically different". What does it mean to say that something is physically different?

Still haven't learned how to demonstrate logical fallacies have you?

You'll have to show that what theists refer to as a person isn't really just these natural processes. Since as we know, theists have often and still confuse the natural process of dying as coming from someone, lightning as coming from someone, diseases as coming from someone what makes you think they're not making the same mistake?

Since we are particularly talking about God here and I have explained to you who God is and how your representation of Him is incorrect. I'd suggest you stick to the argument and stop grasping for straws.

Logicboy03: Not necessarily but wanted peeps to relate it to religion........because it could be

And with this you have effectively neutered your op by admitting that it wasn't necessarily related to religion but you just wanted to paint it with a religious brush.

My job here is done. Thank you

Logicboy03: Ehem....you avoided, the part in bold that destroyed your point!

Is this Anonyism?

That had nothing to do with my point. My point was that if he had committed any crimes, you are guilty of the same. You decided to tell a lie in response

thehomer: How do they know that it was a person and not just a natural processes?

Because it is self contradictory to say that natural processes brought natural laws into being. Secondly because the laws of nature do not exist out of necessity, They can be said to be brought into existence by the creator's choice.

Asked and answered.



In other words, it is as true as the Grim Reaper. If the belief in the Grim Reaper is true, then belief in God is true. If the belief in the Grim Reaper is false, then the belief in God is false. So, is belief in the Grim reaper true or false?



That of course depends on what God is. Since it is a figure of speech, I see no reason to believe in it as an active person and not in the Grim Reaper.

God is only a figure of speech.

In that case, you have presented and argued against a straw man of what theists believe.

Logicboy03: Nope.....the context can only be applied to those who need their titles to lead.....very simple

In that case, it doesn't have a religious subtext as you claim.

Logicboy03: lol.....what the hell are you on about?

I dont abuse unless being insulted first. And most important, I defend my point and explain why I do such. Ho may times do you see me even insulting people day in day out like striky?

Comparing me to striklymi aka outcast is not only silly but dubious


Worse off, you make the assumption that I'm the only one he has been trolling

Lol, seriously? Lying through your teeth these days?

Logicboy03: The context is irrelevant and you indirectly supported that....

If you were left with only the pic (imagine no context)....wouldnt I still be able to relate it to th christian deities claiming to be king?

That's precisely why I said THE CONTEXT IS IMPORTANT! Without context, that quote can be applied to anything thereby making it meaningless.

The fact that you are really determined to take that quote out of context show the dishonest intentions on your part.

Logicboy03: I can always rely on the-homer to put Anony in his place

thehomer: You know me too well.

It is always amusing to watch you two pat yourselves on the back especially after really doing nothing

thehomer: Since I'm not a theist, why don't you tell me?

Of course I will. Theists don't believe God to be a personification of nature's laws rather as one who created the physical universe and also defines the laws of nature themselves.

That's one among many other beliefs.

This does not answer my question. Do you hold that the belief in God is false? Yes or No

You'll be better off presenting it as a belief in the presence of God.

As you would be better of presenting atheism as the belief in the absence of God

I just answered this.

You didn't

Seriously manmustwac, this is becoming quite childish. I see no sense in repeatedly banning outcast for calling logicboy olodo while you allow logicboy to run free calling people names of his own.

Logicboy03:


How...Anony....How?

How the hell are you arguing such?


Gaddem SMH

What are you talking about?

thehomer: God: The (personification of the) laws of nature.

God is only a figure of speech.

Well, the "God" you defined is not how theists define God. In order to say that theists have a false belief, you should first be able to properly represent what theists mean by God.

thehomer: Actually, I do agree with him there. The false beliefs aren't necessarily about God, but in Christianity, there are beliefs like snakes talking, Jonah living in a fish etc.

Don't mistake my decision to engage you here as agreeing with what you said.

Interesting. So your post doesn't imply that belief in God is false?

It is a non-belief.

Lol, yeah right. I also subscribe to the non-belief in the absence of God.

thehomer: God isn't the only belief that people hold.

The important question is whether you think the belief in God is false

Logicboy03: So you admit that the context is irrelevant?

Lol no, absolutely not! That is precisely the opposite of what I'm arguing

Logicboy03: Really? I asked you to prove it by quoting the comment

It is right there in bold red

thehomer: True: Conforming to the actual state of reality or fact; factually correct.
Assessed by how well your beliefs correspond with reality.

Do you agree with these two statements?

I agree. Step 2 how does atheism fit the above definitions. Is atheism true?

Now, as Chomsky wonders, what is a God? Since that is what theism is based on. My explanation of course depends on what a God is.

Since you already hold that a belief in God is a false belief, I'll let you define what God is.

Logicboy03: False. Straw man No where is that assumption made or implied.

Please quote and bold the part where it is implied in The Homer's comment.

I don't think thehomer will agree with you there.

Also, atheism is not a bleief.

Yeah right

Logicboy03: You are very foolish.....

ad hominem is a sign that your rational tank is now running on empty

Let's assume that the context didnt exist and all you had was the picture. Would it make any difference to my allusion towards christian deities?

It also wouldn't make any difference to my allusion towards your father, your boss, your lecturer, your governor e.t.c.

Seriously, troll harder

Your desperate attempt to take the quote out of context says a lot

Logicboy03: How many times do deities in your religion claim that they are the messiah/king of kings/God of gods?

This is precisely why context is important. I can as well ask how many times your father claimed to be your father, or how many times your boss claimed to be your boss.

You see, by stripping that phrase of the context of Joffrey's actual authority in the movie which outc@st so generously provided and you so recklessly rejected, we have simply reduced that statement to mean anything in any context.

Basically I can also say the phrase has a family subtext or political subtext or medical subtext e.t.c. The phrase has no religious subtext, all that happened with you was that you read it with your anti-religion bias. That's all.

thehomer: My main problem with this post is its banality.

For some reason, he gives reasons why it is a waste of time to show these ideas to believers but no reason why it is a waste of time to non-believers. Then he of course ignores the fact that most religious believers actually believe that their doctrines are true. What he of course ignores is that their message is one of avoiding magical thinking, avoiding false beliefs and presenting reasons why it is okay not to believe in Gods. Of course he already doesn't believe, has anyone asked him why he doesn't believe? And why he thinks it is fine for others to believe so strongly and waste so much resources in having false beliefs? If he doesn't want to do it, that's fine. After all, he too believes that people should avoid such poor beliefs but it doesn't mean that others shouldn't share their knowledge of the world and the fact that a God simply isn't needed.

But of course vedaxcool who posted it here won't be able to defend or critique it.

Your post assumes that Chomsky's atheism (or atheism in general) is a true belief. Care to defend how you know that atheism is true?
Start with telling us the definition of truth and how to identify truth and then explain how atheism fits this definition.

Of course you are not like vedaxcool who won't defend or critique his position.

Logicboy03: Then hold your peace.....you dont see a subtext

But you seem to see something, what do you see?

Logicboy03: Another dumbazz that doesnt know the meaning of subtext....

Outcast did nothing than tell a part of the plot of Game of thrones.

Outcast even missed the point of the quote in the Game of thrones. The quote you see there was a reply to a particular statement.
=====================


There is no need for context.....focus on the quote....does this have a religious subtext?

Lol, did you read my post at all or did you just focus on the one sentence you wanted to throw insults at?

As I said I don't see any religious subtext there. If you do, please tell us what it is and which religion it represents

Logicboy03: *Facepalm*

Do you understand the meaning of "subtext"?
The op is not about the film's plot!

I feel what your op lacked and what was provided by outc@st is CONTEXT.

By the way, I don't see any religious subtext in the Game of Thrones. If you do, would you like to tell us what the subtext is and which religion it represents

Awww, those poor poor oppressed muslims. All they wanted was to practice their peaceful religion without being harassed by innocent marathon runners in Boston.

[quote author=inspiredbyGOD:.]Some things don't need to be in the bible before they can be verified to be true.[/quote]Claims like "God is just a title" really need scriptural back up

Not gonna do that. The Christian concept of trinity
is confusing enough.

Lol, as I said, you are not ready for a serious discussion

frosbel: ^^^^


Quit dribbling yourself and dump this pagan philosophy of yours.

My dear frosbel, you are yet to answer my question:

This is interesting: Now here's what I want to ask you: Where do you draw the line between worship and obeisance? What is the difference?
Once you tell me, we will check to see if Jesus was worshiped or paid obeisance to.


It is still waiting there for you whenever you choose to answer it.

mkmyers45: In the sense that they know why there are there, they can look into the mirror knowing what they see and they know the consequences of thier actions...yes we can judge them to be aware based on these

are you saying that robots actually have opinions of themselves?

Logicboy03: A guy strawmanned his own position.....simple and short.....you were the one that jumped the gun and now you need to claim that I am a bigot to prove your empty barrel of a point.

loser

Lolol, you are one funny dude

Logicboy03: Unlike you, I am very confident in my intelligence, I dont have to say things to sound intelligent. You are projecting the way you think unto me...


On topic, Chomsky gave a straw man argument to for his own original statement.

-I havent been thrilled by the new atheist movement
-Iraq War, America's wrong doing in Africa

How does America's wrongdoing relate to criticism of atheism?

You are just biting yourself for nothing. Chomsky only gave his opinion about the New Atheists and why he found the movement unnecessary. He wasn't responding to any argument or arguing against any position. You on the other hand filled with religious zeal felt the need to jump in and defend your "non-belief". Careful man, your atheism is slowly sliding into bigotry

truthislight: you dont receive the holy spirit the way you receive christ.
This "person" is as a breeze and fire.

Receiving christ means receiving christ teachings and way of life.

But for this "person"(holyspirit) you receive one, Bidam receive one, Ihedinobi receives one, Goshen Receives one, Oladegbu receives one, Alexo takes "him" as a gift and the rest Trinitarian takes this person.

How many person are they ?

What a person !

Ok, you Anony shears this one person with Bidam, Ihedinobi shears some also with Oladegbu takes some of this person Goshen360 takes his part of this person, and Joagbaje receives some, Alexo takes some as a gift and all other Trinitarian collects this person, . And this person still, remains as a complete person and not many ?

Smh.

Religion can really make an otherwise intelligent person act and behaves stupidly

I don't know what you are biting yourself for. The bible also says that Christ will dwell in every one of us who receives Him yet He is one Person.

[quote author=inspiredbyGOD:.]You get my point.[/quote]I don't know what point you think I got.

The Egyptian pair of Osiris, Isis and Horus is just one out of many examples of pagan conceptions of trinity.

Lol, seriously? You are welcome to open a thread and then we can discuss your "egyptian trinity"

Haven't seen it yet. {kindly resend it to chinedudaniel7@gmail.com}

ok, will do.

Hahaha, this was precisely what I wanted to discuss with Mr frosbel some time ago. Well, now Mr frosbel has brought up the topic himself, let me ask;

Frosbel, why do you think that Jesus Christ did not pre-exist His birth?

[quote author=inspiredbyGOD:.]I am the son of my father. Oh! Wait, I guess I'll have to validate this truth with the scriptures too.[/quote]This example is unrelated to the discussion we are having.

There is no biblical discussion about trinity because the trinity isn't biblical, it is a pagan concept .

Lol, you haven't been paying attention to your bible then. I am also sure that if I asked you to provide an example of pagan trinity where they believe in one tripersonal God, you won't.

btw, I've sent you my number, give me a buzz sometime