Prove it. A god is anything that has the power to create destory or inspire. If you're claiming that atheists are uninspired by anything, that's an interesting claim.
If you're right, then your own definition is equally not factual. See how that works? You just defeated yourself. Good work, I don't have to anything.
That supports the definition. it doesn't undermine it. A god is a general concept. Didn't I say this already?
Empty claim, lacking evidence rejected.
Not in the slightest, I told you. I'm happy as a kosher-clam. I get to watch God working in your life. Although it seems like you've taken off the buddhist costume. Oh well.
Do you know anything about anger? It's fundemental qualities? Maybe you think you do because your own anger is cloaked in the void that is inside you. But, I actually understand it and how it works.
Let me help you: anger requries a lack of power. without that lack of power it's not anger, it's something else. I am far from powerless. I cannot be angry.
I'm right. Confidence. You perceive it as a negative, because you're wrong, and you can feel it. If you didn't then you would not perceive it as anger. It would be meaningless to you. but sine you never actually learned about the inner-workings of the mind or emotions in your practice, you are simply taught to annihilate them, you are completely oblivious. You think you understand them, because you were able to experience some relief in your life. But that's not from understanding it's from ignorance.
Irrevelvant to the point. Just as a person does not need to believe in gravity for gravity to be a force in the their life, an atheist does not need to believe in a god, for the god to be an influence in their life.
Just as a person might be working for a shell company wihout knowing whom they are working for, an atheist might be serving a god without knowing whom they are serving.
Hence the satanists partnering with the atheists and having a nice laugh about it.
Because it's obvious and you should know the truth. Don't you want the truth? The fact is, if you would listen to me, and learn a little, your arguments would become stronger, and more convincing. You would be able to accomplish more with less. And you would be innoculated against all sorts of deceptions. I'm trying to help you. And everytime you ask for evidence of God, and proclaim you know what a god is, you are giving informed consent for me to try to help you.
You ignored it. Actual critical thinkers do not do this. It can be deadly. Didn't you say that recently? Chicken little pointing up, "the sky is falling, someone said 'God', it could be deadly, watch out!!!!" Some harmless theist says the word God in a debate and you claim it's deadly?
Just like that totally evil comment about tibet, You're charging an unarmed person because they're religious. Shame on you.
I did, I gave you a picture of multiple gods. Real measurable observable gods. I guess I'm correct about the qualities needed to recognize them, and you seem to be lacking them.
Here they are again: Ignorance, jealousy, deception ( not the same as ignorance ), but also duty, and quite a few others. Your god void is in there too. Hee. But it's hiding in plain sight. And you need to level up in order to see it. Have you trid reviewing some koans? They'll really help with this. If in fact you are buddhist.
View attachment 79529
You can be. Sure. Do you deny it?
Why did you crop out the correct and true argument I brought? You are in science denier mode. My claims about atheism are even more simple than the claim about the 2020 election being stolen.
Do you deny that that every single person, 1/3 of Americans, who claim the election was stolen are wrong?
Do you deny that atheism is even more simple of a concept than that? Far and away more simple. Isn't it brain-dead-stupid simple? Don't aethists proclaim that babis are corn atheists? do you see who your own claims prove I'm correct?
What you have not addressed, and probably will not address is the
fact that atheism is not just the "flip side" of theism. They are inverted from each other. They are opposite in every way. This is a concept that is somewhat difficult to grasp. I don't blame you for not getting it. And perhaps that why you are ignoring it.
Theism is just as complicated and diverse AS atheism is simple and uniform. If atheism is infinitely simple and uniform THEN Theism is infinitly complicated and diverse.
Because of this when someone makes a broad sweeping claim about theism, they must bring huge volumes of very strong evidence unless it supports the diversity and the complexity.
Because of this when someone makes a broad sweeping claim about atheism, they do not need to bring huge volumes of very strong evidence to support it because it is supporting the inherent simplicity and lack of diversity.
I have evidence that atheism serves a god. we say it in action right here in this thread. None of you reacted or challenged your commrade when they supported one of the highest forms of evil that existed. All of you who are atheists were serving a god which is void. One of the side-effects of this gaod is that you have no idea you are serving a god, and that makes you open to multiple forms of suggestion, manipluation and deception. I also proved that this is the case. By your own informed consent I used your god against you to prove it's existence.
But I am not angry, I'm happy it worked. And I'm not malicious because I will happily tell you how it works, and I've been trying to do so for multiple posts now.
Hee. No... yu have missed the point. The point is, it is not arrogant to be correct in broad sweeping ways about large portions of people if the claim is of a specific type. S your claim that I am arrogant is without merit. What you are observing in my behavior is just as approriate as the the claims you made above. You made a statement above with absolute certainty. It's not arrogant. What you're saying is not arrogant.
However, you did just admit that a god exists. It's name is "lack the willingness to understand". See how your on statements just keep undermining your position? Probably not. You're still serving the void.
And that supports the definition. It doesn't undermine it.
False. That is the understanding. It is understanding a general concept. Haven't you heard of neti-neti? Negative deductions.
The problem here, which is common, is the conflation of knowledge and understanding. Not knowing can can produce affirmative understanding. But a person needs to know how to do it. Most theists do it instinctivley. They FEEL it. And they don't need to explain it. But some people are less capable. They require absolute intellectual, put it in a box so I can touch it, taste it, smell it, rub it on my face sorts of understanding. I think those people are actually very rare. But for those people there is an intellectual approach they can work with to understand God. It's just very very difficult. Understanding a god is pretty simple. But if a person's god is void, then, even that is unreachable.
And that's the evidence for anyone who isn't serving this god which is void, to see it in action. The evidence is, a person's inability to comprehend a very simple god concept.
Nah. It's just a general category. Love and Hate contradict each other. But please tell me you understand they are both emotions. And a person can engage in a love+hate relationship inspite of the contradiction. That's because the rules you believe in are not valid in this.
Infinite!!!!!
That'a the band wagon fallacy again. It doesn't matter how many of you think what you think. No volume of ignorance undermines even the tinest speck of truth.
If you were critically thinking, you would be bringing a defintion of arrogance, and a defintion of pride. Then you would bring evidence that I am being arrogant, and simultaneously that I am not justified in being proud. That is a proper argument for a critical thinker to make. That is actual critical thinking. Instead, you're playing up the the crowd, the other so-called critical thinkers, and completely oblivious that you are proving my point.
But it's obvous to me, that you don't understand arrogance. You don't understand pride. You don't know their limits, or the sphere of influence. You don't know how it works. If you did you wouldn't be making the claims youre making. Go ahead and try to make your argument, I will bury you. That isn't arrogance, that's a cold hard fact. You may not like how it feels. I don't care.
If you listened to me, your arguments would be stronger, you would be a more effective person. Everytime you ask for evidence, you justify my reaction. I'm showing you. I'm giving you the evidence.
You don't know what you don't know, and that is a lot!
It's beautiful. It's not just you either. The biggest change is @ppp. Totally different tone, opening up, told his story. God helped him through the void. Which is technically a false god, but, anyway. He doesn't even know it. Even @Audie is temporarily posting in a more polite and more reasonable manner.
www.nbcnews.com
