Religion/Spirituality Athiest re-write the 10 commandments

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

@Dafunkdoc_Unlimited is the only person who gets the point, and I'm not of the impression he's an atheist, which makes this thread all the more interesting. The only way for a negative to be a negative is if it is a true negative. Negating the negative is a positive, whether it's logic or numbers, that's the reality. Again, in layman's terms if you can't claim what you don't believe as a fact, then in reality whether you want to admit or not you at least to some degree believe in the opposite. That's "logical equivalence". So in essence logically/mathematically speaking to be an atheist you have to claim that your belief that God doesn't exist to be true.

getting wrapped up in logic doesn't confirm any beliefs you hold outside of your ability to hold conversations hostage with word soup and sophistry to impress bystanders under the guise that you might have a semblance of a clue of WTF you're talking about.

 

[blackzeus]

So if I say I don't believe any of the god stories, what's my claim?

The point is that if you don't believe any of the god stories, and you are not willing to claim your belief is true, then logically speaking, in reality, you do believe in at least some of the god stories. What IMHO you don't realize as a self-aware creature, is that the absence of something is something. In mathematical terms, 0 is a number. The absence of a claim is a claim, the claim being that you claim nothing You believe that you have a choice, but you don't, anymore than a bee has a choice to pollinate, anymore than a dog has a choice to bark, you don't have a choice to believe, if you don't believe in nothing, that's a belief. So you can claim nothing, you can claim what you believe to be false is false, you can claim that you are not sure what you believe to be false is actually false, but whether you want to or not, you are claiming something breh

 

[blackzeus]

False.

Just because animals don't have opposable thumbs doesn't mean they're fukking idiots.

Join us in the 21st century. We have decades of work on cognition to confirm this.

Who said anything about intelligence, I talked about self-awareness and a set of existential belief systems. You think dogs gather together and discuss who formed the sun and the moon, and why the leaves change colors?

Thats the most bullshyt pseudo-science, uninformed pile of garbage you've managed to put together.

It sounds like you read a wikipedia page and decided to become an expert on shyt that doesn't even exist.

Clown.

Leave the actual science rhetoric to people who know wtf they're talking about. You're trying to do your best deepak chopra impression yet sounding like a PTSD vet on the subway.

1) Ad hominem

2) Appeal to authority

Any more fallacies you wish to spew? Again, let's the debate the science of my logic, or let's agree to disagree, I could call you a dumbazz pseudo intellectual who doesn't understand basic modular logic, which is fundamental to all arithmetic, but there's no need to go there. If we can't participate in an intelligent discussion no need to have one breh

 

[blackzeus]

getting wrapped up in logic doesn't confirm any beliefs you hold outside of your ability to hold conversations hostage with word soup and sophistry to impress bystanders under the guise that you might have a semblance of a clue of WTF you're talking about.

I can't believe this is coming from an atheist brehs, or any college educated person. Let's claim to be educated and have a disdain for logic brehs Yes, I have no clue of what I'm talking about about, but you have yet to disprove ternary logic and the law of double negation. Yes breh, I'm the one who's clueless

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Who said anything about intelligence, I talked about self-awareness and a set of existential belief systems. You think dogs gather together and discuss who formed the sun and the moon, and why the leaves change colors?

You presume they don't. I didn't say there was evidence that they do either.

Stop ASSUMING things. This is the entire flaw in your argument.

1) Ad hominem

2) Appeal to authority

So what, you period sponge

Any more fallacies you wish to spew?

I have many more.

Again, let's the debate the science of my logic,

Such phrases are reserved for functional idiots.

"science of my logic"

Oh go fukk yourself. Idiot.

o

r let's agree to disagree, I could call you a dumbazz pseudo intellectual who doesn't understand basic modular logic,

modular logic has nothing to do with your god existing.

which is fundamental to all arithmetic, but there's no need to go there. If we can't participate in an intelligent discussion no need to have one breh

Stop bytching about the frame of debate and address why your god has no evidence of it's existence.

All you can do is whine and moan and try to shift the argument to definitions or syntax or specious understandings of logical fallacies without addressing that you live in a world that has corrupted your mind into believing in a supernatural entity on shytty evidence.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

I can't believe this is coming from an atheist brehs, or any college educated person. Let's claim to be educated and have a disdain for logic brehs Yes, I have no clue of what I'm talking about about, but you have yet to disprove ternary logic and the law of double negation. Yes breh, I'm the one who's clueless

All of this is a ploy from you trying to evade addressing why your theism is inherently flawed.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

The point is that if you don't believe any of the god stories, and you are not willing to claim your belief is true, then logically speaking, in reality, you do believe in at least some of the god stories. What IMHO you don't realize as a self-aware creature, is that the absence of something is something. In mathematical terms, 0 is a number. The absence of a claim is a claim, the claim being that you claim nothing You believe that you have a choice, but you don't, anymore than a bee has a choice to pollinate, anymore than a dog has a choice to bark, you don't have a choice to believe, if you don't believe in nothing, that's a belief. So you can claim nothing, you can claim what you believe to be false is false, you can claim that you are not sure what you believe to be false is actually false, but whether you want to or not, you are claiming something breh

No dumbass.

Asserting disbelief is NOT the same as not having a belief.

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

My position isn't of negating if a god exists, its that one has not been demonstrated TO exist, and even further, in the judeochristian fashion.

Lets say your god exists.

You still have a long way to go before getting to "jesus"

None of this makes any sense since you haven't defined what YOU mean by 'God'.

The term is meaningless to me.

We KNOW Jesus existed.

You sound confused.​

 

[noon]

The point is that if you don't believe any of the god stories, and you are not willing to claim your belief is true, then logically speaking, in reality, you do believe in at least some of the god stories. What IMHO you don't realize as a self-aware creature, is that the absence of something is something. In mathematical terms, 0 is a number. The absence of a claim is a claim, the claim being that you claim nothing You believe that you have a choice, but you don't, anymore than a bee has a choice to pollinate, anymore than a dog has a choice to bark, you don't have a choice to believe, if you don't believe in nothing, that's a belief. So you can claim nothing, you can claim what you believe to be false is false, you can claim that you are not sure what you believe to be false is actually false, but whether you want to or not, you are claiming something breh

This is all babble. If I don't believe any of the god stories, what's my claim? Without making assumptions.

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

This is all babble. If I don't believe any of the god stories, what's my claim? Without making assumptions.

All you're claiming is that you don't believe the stories, not that you don't believe in 'god'.​

 

[noon]

Not believing the 'god' stories =/= not believing 'god' exists.

Re-word the question.​

It's a simple question. Read the previous quotes if you're stuck.

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

It's a simple question.

Answered. Read the edit.​

 

[noon]

Answered. Read the edit.​

Thanks. And while it's a fair answer, the question's directed at someone else.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

None of this makes any sense since you haven't defined what YOU mean by 'God'.

The term is meaningless to me.
​

I'm using your definition

We KNOW Jesus existed.

You sound confused.

No, we don't.

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

I'm using your definition​

I never defined it.
​

No, we don't.

Really?..........



..........keep running from history, Reginald.​