What are you non-believers trying to prove?

Discussion in 'The Sanctuary' started by Hope., Jul 30, 2013.

  1. FeedMeMore

    FeedMeMore Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,138
    Neither do the religious. They don't base it on empirical testing but base it on cues Nobody supports jump feet first based on nothing
    test
  2. FeedMeMore

    FeedMeMore Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,138
    Well the fact you have an incorrect view of religion makes your opinion as bias. There have been many wars without religion to claim religion causes war and conflict is falsehood
    I don't believe in a book simply written and thought by man. That's your opinion on scripture that is incorrect.
    Religion isn't unevident as there is history attached to religion.

    Changing isn't always a good thing. So never changing is sometimes in the best case.

    What kind of proof would you expect there to be. In general I find there not to be a real idea of what would be acceptable proof of God Just a claim non believers like to throw out
    test
  3. FeedMeMore

    FeedMeMore Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,138
    Why is the idea of jobs in heaven funny. Why wouldn't we have responsibility in heaven.
    test
  4. Sir Bustalot

    Sir Bustalot I am Jesus

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2002
    Messages:
    55,612
    its funny to me because the jobs i was told there is in heaven were stupid.

    the 3 main jobs being "member in the heavenly choir", "babysitter at the baby nursery", and "financier"


    thats dumb
    test
  5. FeedMeMore

    FeedMeMore Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,138
    I don't know where they get that specific to say what jobs will be there but having jobs seems ok.
    Why would those jobs be funny
    Choir- Giving Praise and worship to God seems to make sense
    Babysitter Would be better listed as Child Care worker which even now is the most honourable and under appreciated professions.
    I don't get financier

    But I don't see how having jobs is dumb
    test
  6. Sir Bustalot

    Sir Bustalot I am Jesus

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2002
    Messages:
    55,612
    well what if i dont want to sing in a choir? and what could a "financier" do in heaven? run a bank? wtf yo. I also want nothing to do with babies... so i guess ill be unemployed in heaven. Sounds aight, if theres anyplace where being unemployed has nothing but benefits, its heaven.
    test
  7. FeedMeMore

    FeedMeMore Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,138
    Yeah I'm confused about the financier. I'm confused about him knowing what specfic jobs will be in heaven. I'm just saying jobs in heaven do make sense

    People in general need to do useful things to feel useful or fulfilled.
    test
  8. Sir Bustalot

    Sir Bustalot I am Jesus

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2002
    Messages:
    55,612
    I wouldnt have said they were silly if Payback hadnt listed such rediculous jobs.
    test
  9. antilluminati

    antilluminati Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2011
    Messages:
    2,481
    I'm not saying there "is no God". But in a discussion about God, since there is evidence for us not being able to prove there is a God, the burden of proof is on those who believe. I COULD say "there is no God" and you wouldn't be able to prove me wrong, you could ask for evidence and I'd say: "no man has seen him or presented evidence for his existence, which makes him an idea or a concept created by man". If I said "there is a God" you could say" prove it" and I wouldn't be able to.

    I don't know. I am agnostic, but I couldn't prove the existence of a God. That is up to man to prove or simply believe in. Religion has absolutely no authority in my reality without evidence of truth, that's why I follow no religion, but believe in common sense and my own feelings of conscience, fairness and truth. I don't believe in mans word, which religion is, I believe in what I see as true based on a sober mind and rationality.
    • +Rep +Rep x 1
    test
  10. Sir Bustalot

    Sir Bustalot I am Jesus

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2002
    Messages:
    55,612
    in kung fu were taught to not believe it works and to go test it out for ourselves.

    Thats a good philosophy for life in general. Because ACTUAL experience is the best kind of knowledge.
    Last edited: Aug 21, 2013
    • +Rep +Rep x 2
    test
  11. reggie jax

    reggie jax Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,351
    that system works ok for 2 people deciding if they want to be together or not... but not so well for an individual trying to discover the truth about existence. when it comes to the latter, empiricism is a better method than intuition.
    test
  12. FeedMeMore

    FeedMeMore Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,138
    Not really as some things we don't have the means to test. We have to throw assumptions and then claim they are facts.
    test
  13. FeedMeMore

    FeedMeMore Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,138
    Lack of evidence doesn't mean much in proving Go. As many have had experience. The burden of proof argument is just those who have no argument so they put the pressure on the other side.
    test
  14. Sir Bustalot

    Sir Bustalot I am Jesus

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2002
    Messages:
    55,612
    its not hard to understand why people want physical proof or evidence of god to ever believe he/she/it exists.

    the best kind of knowledge is experience. If someone hasnt experienced "god" i dont blame them for not believing.
    test
  15. Caesar

    Caesar Natural Aristocracy

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2009
    Messages:
    2,610
    This is retarded beyond words.
    test
  16. Caesar

    Caesar Natural Aristocracy

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2009
    Messages:
    2,610
    So theists don't need physical evidence to argue their case

    But atheists do.

    Got it.
    Last edited: Aug 22, 2013
    test
  17. reggie jax

    reggie jax Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,351
    we're going in circles here.

    for empirical claims, you need empirical evidence. i.e. if you're making a claim about the nature of the real world that is either true or false by definition, then the only way that claim should be taken seriously is if there is something tangible to back it up. this is why science, i.e. the system by which we seek to explain the world around us, uses empirical standards.

    so if you make some empirical claim that you don't have the means to test, then that just means you've made a frivolous claim.

    in the case of relationships, we're either dealing with something subjective (i.e. love is in the eye of the beholder) or something in which if it can be tested, it's not practical to do so given the purpose that human relationships serve. due to the nature of these relationships, they have to rely on intuition, because that's how they developed and it is the only way we're equipped to approach them. the purpose they serve is to bring people together to mate. as long as they do that successfully enough, it doesn't matter if people gain misconceptions about their relationship in the process. nothing is harmed in that case, as the purpose is served regardless.

    on the other hand, if you are trying to decode existence and you rely on intuition, you run a high risk of being wrong. there's no inherent mechanism to steer you away from bad results like there is with relationships. hence why all those philosophers from antiquity were wrong about so many things, because the only tool they had was intuition + logic. that isn't good enough for these purposes. hence the scientific revolution. hence progress. hence the world we live in today.
    test
  18. antilluminati

    antilluminati Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2011
    Messages:
    2,481
    Please enlighten me on how experiencing God is and how you know for a fact that IS the experience you are having.

    I have had many moments of clarity and enlightenment in my life, as well as borderline euphoric episodes and having my "prayers" heard. i cant explain it, it could be attributed to a higher power, and it may not, just because someone has described something similar as having this connotation doesnt make it so.

    id like it to be, but to claim fact needs evidence, not when refuting something that hasnt been proved.

    its like saying the sun is marshmallow in the centre. the burden of evidence is with those who start the claim and not with the ones contesting it. sceptics didnt come first, the claim of god did. thats why they have to prove it, otherwise it is a theory, not factual enough to hold any authority.
    Last edited: Aug 22, 2013
    test
  19. FeedMeMore

    FeedMeMore Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,138
    No if you make the claim than God is not true than I can definatly ask how you know that to make the claim i the whole onus argument is to make a claim that you can't prove so you won't try.

    I don't believe God as a fact. I believe God is true. I don't worry about facts over what is truth. As facts can change
    test
  20. FeedMeMore

    FeedMeMore Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,138
    Atheist are the ones who usually claim that everything can be proven empirically Atheists are the one who put physical evidence as the supreme ruler to what is and is not true in the world
    test

Share This Page

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)