serp777
Well-Known Member
Continued
1. A big difference from what exactly?
...........
5. What did it feel like being proved wrong? Not very nice is it?
Do you know what an implication is? Why would I assume that you're talking about some irrelevant person that isn't in this discussion. You're disguising your sentences' ambiguity under a false pretense.I haven't now. I said "another misrepresentation or an outright lie." I did not say from you. This comprehension thing gets worse.
Absurd. Both methods are equally ambiguous, and you haven't demonstrated different levels of ambiguity. And your response isn't appropriate because magic concepts transmitted to your brain isn't any better than hearing voices. It doesn't matter what the method was, you're missing the point.Yes it does, the alternative is to allow complete ambiguity by confusing how the Holy Ghost communicates. You said "Also saying you know its true because you hear voices from a Ghost isn't an argument." Specifying that I heard. as with my ears, voices. My response is appropriate, I have not heard voices so your words misrepresent me or they are based on a lie. Either Way, it brings your intentions into question on here.
No you haven't demonstrated i have a lack of knowledge. You asserted it based on your own belief system. I also never said you were here to convert so i don't know why you're making such an irrelevant red herring.How do you know that. You have already proven you lack of knowledge in Christianity so why would you expect me to believe that without solid evidence. Secondly, I am not in competition with any other belief system. I am nor here to convert anyone to my way of thinking. The Christian values that I adhere to are all found in the scripture, there is nothing extraordinary that I believe in
Half of your arguments rely on faith and apriori beliefs which are in contradiction with the faith and apriori beliefs of scientologists. They can't both be true. Therefore both are equally valid and therefore your faith based arguments are entirely unreliable. I also never said you were seeking popularity. Another misrepresentation of my position--yet another strawman you've attacked.I don't know why you are telling me that. I simply have no concern as to what other religions think. I am not a school boy in the play ground seeking popularity.
You'll have to rephrase #1 because its incomprehensible. I however recognzie that in these long posts its easy to make mistakes. Everyone makes them.1. You said that "Your word that your mind didn't make an illusion for you isn't persuasive or convincing to anyone." As illusions are "an instance of a wrong or misinterpreted perception of a sensory experience." one would naturally expect them to be seen with the natural eye or the minds eye, therefore, by saying what you said could equally mean actually vision or vision within your mind, therefore, when you say that you never said anything about seeing it with your eyes you are not be accurate or truthful
2. I know it like I a blind man knows when someone walks in the room. He knows that it is not him. What magic concept do you refer to. I have said nothing that can be interpreted as magical.
3. I have never said that I know everything and to my knowledge I have never given that impression.
#2. Its magical if God is beaming information into your head.
#3. Well when god is beaming concepts into your head I have no idea of knowing how much knowledge God beamed.
So basically you give up this argument. This is a surrender. You do have explaining to do. You have to explain how you would recognize the devil. The devil is supposedly a master deciever that everyone is susceptible to.I have no explaining to do. You either believe me or you don't. Satan has no power over me, or anybody else. And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
I mean you recognize how ridiculous your argument is, right? it would be like saying: "I know that you're wrong about everything in this debate. You either believe me or you don't". What was the point of saying this since it isn't even an argument?
You assume that you'd be able to recognize the devil. And your assumptions can clearly be faulty and wrong. They have no reasonable basis .Yes, assumptions based on the content of your posts which suggests that you are an atheist. My assumptions are only valid to me. I am not making assumptions for anything else.
How so?Your statement does not logically follow from the previous statement.
#1. Well it is a debate so i don't know what you're expecting, but it is indeed argumentative along with everything else i've said. If you aren't interested in arguments then why are you in the religious debate section?1. Yes, that is quite facetious and provocatively argumentative.
2. I said "Sorry, but you are speaking from ignorance. You don't know what you are talking about." I used the word "you" so I was refering to you and not everybody else. You use verybody else just to vilify me. Just another example of you sophistry.
3. I have no idea what you mean by magical concepts, other than you are using it to intentionally taunt me, just like an atheist would do.
#2. Well as far as i'm aware not many people have a hotline to God. Apparently you do with your concept beaming technology or magic or whatever you want to call it.
#3. How else should i describe it? How is it not magical/supernatural? Is God using some brain upload technology thats non magical?
1. I know you didn't define him thus, that is what I said.
2. In case you didn't know, I cannot prove anything about God. Nothing at all.
3. There is a very logical reason. God id a perfect being. To expose Him to imperfection would contaminate and desecrate Him
4. If you do not don't accept the ideology of Christian theology why are you here trying to demolish the beliefs of those who do agree with them? It sound a bit contentious.
5. Again, why are you here if you think that whatever any Christian says on here is senseless to you.
#1. Not according to what you said before.
#2. Another great reason why most of your points rest on an unstable foundation.
#3. According to whom? What evidence do you have that that's true?
#4. Because they make no sense and this thread isn't specifically about Christianity. I never said I would argue within the framework of Christianity. I'm not accepting Christian propositions to be true for the sake of argument. I'll only accept them if you have sufficient reason or evidence to show that they're likely. So far most of your arguments rely on faith and assertions. Worse yet, you've included almost no scriptural quotes to show that your beliefs are actually consistent with Christianity and the bible.
#5. I never said I think whatever any Christian says on here is senseless. Yet another strawman. Seriously can you stop misrepresenting what I'm saying? Its not intellectually honest.
#1. Well that's just the limit of your cognition and imagination. I can forsee situations where you have partial free will, but because of brain damage you're not able to make a choice thats totally your own. Or perhaps neurotransmitters in the brain change the way you think thus affecting the free will of your decision by making you lean a certain direction. I happen to be able to put together more complex scenarios.1. What blurred lines could there be. You have a choice or you don't have a choice. It is black and white logic.
2. You can be judged fairly if you have full free agency, you cannot be judged at all if you have no free agency. There is no grey area.
3. Again, you use another straw man. We are not talking about being black, white or grey. The conclusion that we can draw from that cannot be attributed to free will as one is colours and the other is authority. Guess what that is. It is a non-sequitur because it does not logically follow from the previous statement
#2. Proof that there is no grey area?
#3. Wow you don't actually know what an analogy is do you? The black grey and white thing was an analogy for having no free will, having partial free will, and having full free will respectively. Its not irrelevant you just didn't understand.
#1. Completely ludicrous. You've been trying to prove many of my points wrong, to no avail.1. I have not tried to prove anyone wrong. That is not in my persona. I have merely been expressing my opinion.
2. It may well be entertaining for you to prove others wrong, although I doubt that it doesn't happen that much, but it can be quite upsetting for those who are proved wrong, especially when they are not actually wrong. In debate there is no right or wrong, there are just opinions and beliefs. No debater walks way from a debate thinking that they are wrong.
3. If my opinions prove people right then I am enthralled that I have done that. I never try and prove people wrong, I express my opinion. It is unethical to come on here with the sole purpose to make people miserable by proving them wrong, especially when they use underhanded debating tactics to do it. It is sick.
4. I know that they influence you with the environment, however, you said that alcoholism is down to our genes when that is not the only reason.
5. If you want to think I am wrong then please be my guest. I will stick with reality.
#2. Also complete nonsense. I have walked away from debates knowing i was wrong. And I learned a lot. that disproves your assertion. And there is right and wrong in a debate. that's why you have debates--to discern the truth. Its not just a matter of opinion in many cases, although it could be.
#3. You've tried to prove me wrong literally in this same paragraph with the alcoholism thing. Where is your short term memory?
#4. I didn't say it was the only reason and you're pointing out trivial semantics to try and win a point which is inconsistent with #1 ironically. I've stated numerous times that the environment and culture play an important part. You've addressed those points. its obvious you're desperately trying to win a small point because you're spiteful over the fact that i've been proving you wrong over and over again.
#5. Nice zinger although there's no content.