Play nice kids, 10 or 12 posts over the past 3 or 4 pages have been deleted due to personal attacks, If this continues thread will be closed
|
Play nice kids, 10 or 12 posts over the past 3 or 4 pages have been deleted due to personal attacks, If this continues thread will be closed
That shows you do not know me. I have no problem at all to be treated in a similar way, without all that lying and cheating and twisting words etc. that is going on here by theists...Quote:
Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck
You seem to copy now one of the many tricks by some here : putting words in someone's mouth, words that I have never expressed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck
I do not suppose that at all. I would prefer if theists (please note that this is not the christianity board) would be strongly supporting their views, and admit where and when they have to support their religious beliefs in a subjective way. That would make them HONEST peers in arguments. I have great respect for people who do not claim "that is so" but who instead state "I believe so".
I do not accept subjective evidence, but am open to even the smallest iota of objective supported evidence. But nobody seems to be able to provide that. I wonder why...Quote:
Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck
Once more : that is another wild claim you can not objectively support. That is what you BELIEVE to be so.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck
And again : I do not accept subjective evidence, but am open to even the smallest iota of objective supported evidence. But nobody seems to be able to provide that. I wonder why...
Again Chuck : I thought you could do better than this !
:D
Then why do you constantly ask for objective supporting evidence?Quote:
Originally Posted by Credendovidis
That is complete self contradiction.Quote:
You do not need belief in such evidence. Belief you need as support for claims. I do not claim anything, I just question religious claims.
Lets break it down:
1. You constantly ask for objective supporting evidence, but you don't believe in it.
2. You claim you don't need to believe such evidence, and again, you constantly request such evidence.
3. You claim all you need is belief for your claims, yet when we present our beliefs you demand objective evidence for them.
4. Then you claim that you don't claim anything. Obviously you claim that we don't have enough evidence for our beliefs. So you are either lying or you don't know the meaning of your words.
About the only thing that you got right in that whole statement is the idea that "you just question religious claims." That is true. That's all I've seen you question.
That isn't true at all. You have made many claims but the one you make most frequently is that we have no evidence:Quote:
==
"however none of the claims you have made are backed by any such evidence. "
I have not made any claims.
Here's a quote from "where did the body go" posted by achampio. You said, in message #11:
The only problem is that your acceptance of a higher power on itself is also a submission to something for which there is no objective supporting evidence, but is based on some human created "god". Just one more step, and you are a true humanist also ...
No actually. I think you just don't know the meaning of the term "objective evidence".Quote:
That is already done sufficiently here on this board by theists.
Since we often provide the intricate detail of trees and other living creatures as evidence, please tell me how that evidence is not objective. Since both you and everyone here and anywhere on earth can examine living creatures of some sort, even if it is simply your own living body, then that is as objective as it can get.
We examine that objective evidence and come to the conclusion that God exists.
You on the other hand, keep putting forth your subjective idea that there is not enough evidence for the existence of God. But you haven't examined any evidence to support that conclusion, so your subjective conclusion is supported by absolutely no objective evidence. Whereas our subjective conclusion is supported by much objective evidence.
It is quite obvious that you have no idea what is objective and what is subjective.
===
She didn't use the term "religious beliefs" because obviously you have no "religious beliefs".Quote:
"In fact most of your beliefs are based on Faith not facts. "
A wild claim. What religious beliefs may that be? I have no religious beliefs.
Yes you do. Your constant refrain that believers have no support for their beliefs is offending and condescending.Quote:
===
"So please before you make condescending remarks about other people's beliefs, consider and examine your own beliefs and you will realise that it takes as much faith to believe what you believe as it does any other religious belief. "
How nice... I do not make condescending remarks about other people's beliefs.
And I quote:
The reality is that believers claim something without being capable of providing even the smallest iota of objective supporting evidence for what they claim.
It is especially offending because you obviously have no idea that the word "belief" has more than the one meaning which you assign to it.
Neither are your beliefs reality simply because you hold them. But at least we have objective evidence to back up our beliefs. Whereas all you seem to have is a contrary attitude which simply has a knee jerk reaction to anything religious.Quote:
Instead I respect other people's religious views. But that does not make their religious claims reality.
Who made the claim that you had religious beliefs? You have no idea the meaning of words so you think that everything that is a matter of faith has to do with religion. But you are wrong.Quote:
And note : I have no religious beliefs.
I've already shown you that you don't know the entire meaning of the word "belief". And here is the meaning of the word "faith".
# religion: a strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny; "he lost his faith but not his morality"
# complete confidence in a person or plan etc; "he cherished the faith of a good woman"; "the doctor-patient relationship is based on trust"
# religion: an institution to express belief in a divine power; "he was raised in the Baptist religion"; "a member of his own faith contradicted him"
# loyalty or allegiance to a cause or a person; "keep the faith"; "they broke faith with their investors"
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
You obviously have faith in your powers of cognition. You believe you are correct in your claim that the existence of God can't be proven.
Those are your unsupported subjective claims and beliefs. And you have faith that you are correct in holding them.
Yes, it does. But you don't understand the word "faith." You throw it around a lot without knowing the meaning.Quote:
It does not require any faith at all to accept what you claim I believe.
Contradicting yourself again. Didn't you just say, Wrong, totally wrong! I do not believe in things that have objective supporting evidence.Quote:
I base as Secular Humanist my life's philosophy on reality and objective supporting evidence. Not on dogmatic religious claims.
But if you have objective evidence, where is it? I haven't seen it. You haven't even claimed to examine the evidenc we presented.
Good one! I couldn't have said it better myself.Quote:
===
"You are only creating a double standard which makes you appear to be a hypocrite."
Yeah, there is.Quote:
There is no double standard.
You want objective support for our claims but you provide none for yours.
Show me. Start by showing that you even understand what the word "objective" means.Quote:
My views are based on objective supporting evidence.
We believe the religious claims because we have examined the objective evidence which lead to the conclusion that God exists.Quote:
Your views are based on religious claims.
Nope. The one holding the double standard is you.Quote:
The ones who try to create double standards are people like you, who insist that because they believe something, that they may use that something and elevate it to the "one and only truth". You may do that at for instance the Christianity board, but not here, on the religious discussions board.
Awesome Sassy! Wonderful post!Quote:
Thanks sassyT !
I'm baaack.Quote:
Now : has anyone anything to add to this ? Just feel free to react !
;)
Sincerely,
De Maria
Because that is the only way to get REAL answers based on facts and reality, instead of reply based on feelings, on subjective babble, on hot air wild claims.Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
Also I asked for opinions on the objectionable approach by certain theists on this board to lie , twist words, draw deliberate wrong conclusions, accuse others without objective supporting evidence, and not to supply objective supporting evidence for their own wild claims, etc. etc. etc. as soon as they encounter anyone with views conflicting with their own.
Logically when asking that I do not need more subjective empty babble and deliberate distorted replies.
===
PS : Do you know the following expression : "A fool can ask more questions than all wise men can answer"?
Look at the length of your post...
===
Yes. And it's not an improvement !Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
:D :rolleyes: :p :rolleyes: :D
Apparently, some fail to see the difference between 'science' and 'religious faith.' Sassy accuses me saying she's wrong just because she doesn't 'believe' as she. Wrong. She's wrong because I base my knowledge of evolution on carefully researched criteria, while she bases her 'knowledge' of it on disproved - by research - claims made largely by those who demand a supernatural explanation of life.
So-called 'transitional' fossils exist in abundance. That Sassy's sources refuse to acknowledge them is irrelevant to their existence. Mostly the problem is in the outdated use of the term.
DeMaria's claim of objective evidence for God - any god - is nonsense. By definition, such evidence cannot exist.
[RELIGION: 1): the service and worship of God or the supernatural; 2): a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
FAITH: (1): firm belief in something for which there is no proof
SCIENCE: 1: the state of knowing : knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding 2: a department of systematized knowledge as an object of study; 3 a: knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method; b: such knowledge or such a system of knowledge concerned with the physical world and its phenomena]
[QUOTE].. lol All you have done is given your humanistic religious bable that are based on ZERO facts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Credendovidis
[QUOTE]Also I asked for opinions on the objectionable approach by certain theists on this board to lie , twist words, draw deliberate wrong conclusions, accuse others without objective supporting evidence, and not to supply objective supporting evidence for their own wild claims, etc. etc. etc. as soon as they encounter anyone with views conflicting with their own.
.
Hey wait a minute.. I have a great idea for you Credo.. maybe if you don't want to hear anymore "religious bable", how about if you just stay away from the RELIGIOUS FORUMS ;)Quote:
Logically when asking that I do not need more subjective empty babble and deliberate distorted replies.
===
PS : Do you know the following expression : "A fool can ask more questions than all wise men can answer"?
Look at the length of your post...
===
Yes. And it's not an improvement !
:
lol you come on a religious forum and demand non religious discussions.. lol you really crack me up. :D
You need to find better ways to spend your free time than harassing people on religious forums. Seriously :rolleyes:
Who are you addressing here?Quote:
Originally Posted by WVHiflyer
There is good reason for discussions on a religious board to be done in clear language instead of in babble full of empty claims.Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
What is astounding here is the approach by some theists to lie and cheat in their posts...
No I don't. All I do is pointing out that arguments based on religious views are arguments based on subjective wild claims. That in sharp contrast with the objective supported evidence that is the basis for Secular Humanist views.Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
Do you perhaps claim the capacity for humour?Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
:D :rolleyes: :D :rolleyes: :D
[QUOTE]I consider Evolution a Faith not Science. The essence of the scientific method is measurement, observation and repeatability. Neither Creation nor Evolution are scientific in this sense. Neither one can be tested, for the simple reason that we cannot repeat history. The origin of the universe, life and mankind all took place in the past and cannot be studied or repeated in the laboratory. No one, in all human history has ever observed macro evolution taking place anywhere not even in the fossil record.Quote:
Originally Posted by WVHiflyer
Belief in the theory of evolution is thus exactly parallel to belief in special creation.. both are concepts which believers know to be true but neither, up to the present, has been capable of proof.
As far as supernatuaral goes I just think it is the only possible way the universe could have come into being. Your belief in evolution relies on the assumption of naturalism.
The problem is with the so called transitional fossils is that evolutionist have not been able to distinguish the difference between these imaginary transitional creatures and normal species.Quote:
So-called 'transitional' fossils exist in abundance. That Sassy's sources refuse to acknowledge them is irrelevant to their existence. Mostly the problem is in the outdated use of the term.
The is no way to prove God 100%. The only way to do that is if God showed his face in the sky and he spoke to everyone, and all would see and hear him. (God is not going to do that) However there is objective, achaelogical, scientific, historical, testimonial evidence to prove the creadibility and accuracy of the Bible. Like I gave Credo the example (which he convieniently chose to ignore) the account of the plagues sent to Egypt in the book of exodus has proven to have historical evidence that it really happened. The Ancient Egyptians wrote on papyrus about events that occurred that are consistent with the Bibles account. For example the Egyptians wrote that their rivers turned to blood which is consistent with the Bibles account of one of the plagues sent to Egypt.Quote:
DeMaria's claim of objective evidence for God - any god - is nonsense. By definition, such evidence cannot exist.
So the bottom line is there is evidence for God. The evidence is there but it is just a matter of whether you accept it as sufficient or not of which your choise is a purely subjective decision.
[QUOTE]If your idea of "a good approach to debate" is everyone just agreeing with your beliefs then you need to go to a non-religious forum because here you will find people like me who will expose the flaws & fallacies of your beliefs and disagree with them. If that offends then like I keep saying, stay away from religious forums.Quote:
Originally Posted by Credendovidis
I have given you one piece of objective evidence for Biblical claims and you have convieniently ignored and brushed it off. I am yet to see objective supported evidence for the claims your religion makes that there is no god.Quote:
No I don't. All I do is pointing out that arguments based on religious views are arguments based on subjective wild claims. That in sharp contrast with the objective supported evidence that is the basis for Secular Humanist views.
:rolleyes:
But you said that you don't take objective evidence into account, as you said,Quote:
Originally Posted by Credendovidis
I do not believe in things that have objective supporting evidence.
, so apparently you rely on... feelings, on subjective babble, on hot air wild claims.
As I said, the only that STILL hasn't provided any evidence is YOU.Quote:
Also I asked for opinions on the objectionable approach by certain theists on this board to lie , twist words, draw deliberate wrong conclusions, accuse others without objective supporting evidence, and not to supply objective supporting evidence for their own wild claims, etc. etc. etc. as soon as they encounter anyone with views conflicting with their own.
Exactly as we feel. Again, you have not demonstrated that you know the difference between subjective and objective. We also don't need you repeating your own subjective claims when we ask for objective evidence.Quote:
Logically when asking that I do not need more subjective empty babble and deliberate distorted replies.
===
I didn't ask questions. I refuted your claims. That is a big difference.Quote:
PS : Do you know the following expression : "A fool can ask more questions than all wise men can answer"?
Look at the length of your post...
===
I noticed. Cause you're still here.Quote:
Yes. And it's not an improvement !
:D :rolleyes: :p :rolleyes: :D
:D
Sincerely,
De Maria
Quote:
Originally Posted by Credendovidis
Mostly Sassy & De M... It's clear you know what objective evidence is...
[QUOTE=sassyT]Consider evo a faith all you want. You will still be wrong - a fact. The evidence of macro-evo has been found. You will forever refuse to recognize it. It even makes me wonder, if God himself told you evolutionary science was correct, would you believe him, or think 'he' was an agent of the devil trying to deceive you..Quote:
I consider Evolution a Faith not Science. The essence of the scientific method is measurement, observation and repeatability. Neither Creation nor Evolution are scientific in this sense. Neither one can be tested, for the simple reason that we cannot repeat history. The origin of the universe, life and mankind all took place in the past and cannot be studied or repeated in the laboratory. No one, in all human history has ever observed macro evolution taking place anywhere not even in the fossil record.
Belief in the theory of evolution is thus exactly parallel to belief in special creation.. both are concepts which believers know to be true but neither, up to the present, has been capable of proof.
As far as supernatuaral goes I just think it is the only possible way the universe could have come into being. Your belief in evolution relies on the assumption of naturalism.
Yet you presumably want us to believe in God without that 100% proof, but deny the possibility that science can come to a reasonable conclusion on a preponderance of actual, physical evidence. The 'evidence for God' you mention is only evidence that certain events took place - not an iota of what caused them. There are scientific reasons and hypotheses for every one of the 7 plagues without a supernatural cause. And BTW, None of those historical archives mentions Jesus - except the Bible.Quote:
The is no way to prove God 100%. The only way to do that is if God showed his face in the sky and he spoke to everyone, and all would see and hear him. (God is not going to do that) However there is objective, achaelogical, scientific, historical, testimonial evidence to prove the creadibility and accuracy of the Bible. Like I gave Credo the example (which he convieniently chose to ignore) the account of the plagues sent to Egypt in the book of exodus has proven to have historical evidence that it really happened. The Ancient Egyptians wrote on papyrus about events that occurred that are consistent with the Bibles account. For example the Egyptians wrote that their rivers turned to blood which is consistent with the Bibles account of one of the plagues sent to Egypt.
So the bottom line is there is evidence for God. The evidence is there but it is just a matter of whether you accept it as sufficient or not of which your choise is a purely subjective decision.
So... the bottom line is that there is not any evidence for any god. So belief in one IS purely subjective. But acceptance of physical evidence is only subjective for those who wish not to see it.
[QUOTE][QUOTE=WVHiflyer]Like I said before you believe evolution is a fact based on the faith you have that the "missing link" is somewhere out there and will be found some day. However the reality is there are no series of chronological fossils that have been observed to qualify the claims made by evo as fact. The so called transitional fossil you have posted is not a transitional fossil because it's traits resemble those of animals we see today, there is nothing that sets it apart. The same can and has been said about the other "transitionals" that evolutionist claim, in fact a lot of them have turned out to be frauds.Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
The scientific problems and incosistencies of the theory of evo are so over whelmingley obvious that it faces collapse on all fronts. The only thing holding the tattered theory together is the powerful desire of million of people to hold on to the notion of evo, regardless of its scientific weakness, because the alternative is unthinkable to its practitioners.
Don't get it twisted, I have 100% personal evidence in my life that God exists. But you do not have 100% scientific evidence for evolution but you believe it anyway, which is fine you just need to acknowledge the fact that it is By FAITH.Quote:
Yet you presumably want us to believe in God without that 100% proof, but deny the possibility that science can come to a reasonable conclusion on a preponderance of actual, physical evidence.
.Quote:
The 'evidence for God' you mention is only evidence that certain events took place - not an iota of what caused them. There are scientific reasons and hypotheses for every one of the 7 plagues without a supernatural cause
How convenient..
Let me difine hypothesis for you again:-
Something taken to be "true" for the purpose of argument or investigation; an assumption.
The antecedent of a conditional statement.
This is your belief.. but in reality there are plenty of non biblical references to Jesus (and events that surround him) made by Flavius Josephus jewish historian, Tacitus Roman historian, Lucian Greek writer and rhetorician and many others. Do you research before you make ignorant claims.Quote:
And BTW, None of those historical archives mentions Jesus - except the Bible.
That is the problem, there is no physical evidence for evolution. The fossil evidence just does not offer any support for the theory. So your acceptance of the inconclusive and weak "evidence" for the theory is subjectively by faith.Quote:
So... the bottom line is that there is not any evidence for any god. So belief in one IS purely subjective. But acceptance of physical evidence is only subjective for those who wish not to see it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by inthebox
Well whatever. If you read back over some of her other posts you can clearly see her disrespect. And I simply came on this thread to point that out. She is abrasive and attacking in most of her responses.
She came onto a previous thread that I had closed because of her just to attack. She didn't even respond to the OP's question!
But either or, my stance on this topic is merely to point out that some of the "believers" are being hypocritical by being rude and distasteful to others. I believe in God. So you can't say I am defending credo because I believe the same as him. I just respect his views as I respect other's views. AND SO SHOULD EVERYONE ELSE.
But as sassy as already pointed out to me, I am but a stupid and ignorant person.
(but you know what, I feel good about myself and I don't care what other people think of me and I sleep just fine at night. Oh, and by the way I have a 4 year college degree (not just a student) and I graduated with honors from high school. SO I guess all my teachers were stupid too. :D )
Have fun everyone. I said my part and I'm off to other things!! ;)
So what is rude about that achampio21?
You are the one who is rude and have been attacking me. Lets see who is really rude shall we...
RUDE QUOTES By ACHAMPIO21
Mmm...Quote:
Obviously, she is soooo confused that she can't remember which area she is studying. Or could it be that she is lying?
Oh...Quote:
What you arguing is the same as someone saying that the crayon they are using to color cookie monster is black. And you would come back with "you are so ignorant, that crayon is NOT black it is all different colors combined to make one color so therefore it is not black it is... blah blah blah." BUT WHAT DOES THE CRAYOLA BOX SAY IT IS..... FREAKIN BLACK!!!!!!
Okey...Quote:
I mean come on. GET OVER IT!! HE DOESN"T THINK LIKE YOU AND DOESN"T BELIEVE IN A DEITY!!!! it's really okay. REALLY.
Mmm...Quote:
I obviously know more about grammar and spelling than little miss science masters student.
Mmm... really...Quote:
have a 2 year old that acts more mature than you do. He says please and thank you. And my seven year old has better grammar skills than you do. HA!
Oookey...Quote:
also find it very hard to believe that you are a science masters student, let alone a HIGH SCHOOL graduate. Your grammar skills suck. And you obviously don't know what the basic idea of a "debate" is.
Okey if you say so.. now can you leave me alone?Quote:
Are you still an embryo with a tail? HUH NO! YOU EVOLVED INTO A BABY! THEN EVOLVED INTO... whatever you are now
Please stop pointing fingures at me and please just leave me alone. I was never discussing anything with you and I want to keep it that way. So move on.. please
As far as the believers on this forum, we respect everyone's views.Quote:
Originally Posted by achampio21
But if you claim to be defending Crede's position, perhaps you can provide the objective evidence he is sorely lacking. Otherwise you are just repeating his error.
Or are you making the same mistake he is making? We don't object to his right to believe whatever he wants. However, if he insists we provide objective evidence for our stance, and we have, he should provide objective evidence for his. That is only fair, isn't it?
I haven't read every single message on this board, and if you are right, I have missed that one. And it seems out of character for Sassy. So, would you quote the exact words she used against you and give us a message # so we can confirm that your accusations are true?Quote:
But as sassy as already pointed out to me, I am but a stupid and ignorant person.
(but you know what, I feel good about myself and I don't care what other people think of me and I sleep just fine at night. Oh, and by the way I have a 4 year college degree (not just a student) and I graduated with honors from high school. SO I guess all my teachers were stupid too. :D )
Have fun everyone. I said my part and I'm off to other things!! ;)
Sincerely,
De Maria
Okay here are the quotes. The one's in red were made directly to me. Other's were made to other people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
thought you "respected what other's believed...Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
But it's okay for YOU to imply someone is ignorant?! Hmm hypocrite to the extreme!Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
And if you don't want to hear humanistic babble than you should stay away from credo!!Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
THEN WHY DID YOU IM ME AND ATTACK ME??Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
And Sassy I never said that I didn't fight fire with fire. I was rude also. But took great offense to the fact that you implied I was ignorant simply because I questioned you. So I threw the mud right back. It wasn't right but I did it. And I am admitting it. And I am ending it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
Okay I am not really defending his position per say, but defending his right to his own position. But I believe in evolution and I believe in God. I kow for a fact that humans evolve all the time. Because like I stated previously we start as embryo's with tails and evolve into a baby. Frogs do the same thing. And in a previous post by miss sassyt she demands 100% proof of evolution.
NOT ONCE did anyone demand 100% proof from believers. Just a little objective evidence. So like I said before. Whatever. I don't think anyone is wrong on this board.Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
Okay one more edit... Just an FYI sassy said her 100% proof of God is that someone she knew was healed. Well, IF I wanted to argue that, my point would be this... my father died in Jan of 2007 from cancer. 3 months prior to that he had been healed from the cancer. I lost 2 babies in between the 3 that I have. And my youngest was diagnosed IUGR and I was told he had 0% chance of survival. And you know what... he was the biggest of my three kids and is the healthiest of all today. But I quit my job and went on bed rest for 3 months and force fed myself. So you could say God did it or you caould say I did it. Either way, THERE ISN"T 100% proof of ANYTHING!! No one will know the truth until we die. So I have lost and I have won. I stated in a previous post on a different board that I believe in God because of my 3 kids. i make sacrifices EVERYDAY for my kids and I pay taxes and I work full time and I never see my husband and I have lived a pretty rough and unfair life. ALL OF THOSE THINGS could be argued as "proof" that God doesn't exist. But I still believe. And I have NEVER once said anyone is wrong. I just think "fair" would be that no one says anyone is wrong. Unless you are talking about things that CAN be proven.
Anyway, De Maria we have spoken and we have agreed and I have learned many things from you. And I respect you for respecting my questions. I just wish everyone could act the way you did with me.
[QUOTE]You "know" humans evolved over time based on your faith in an unproven theory.Quote:
Originally Posted by achampio21
No believer here claimed "fact" about their beliefs so why should we give 100% evidence. If you claim something is a FACT you better be prepared to provide 100% evidence. A fact is reality something that is 100% true and has 100% evidence. So if you are claiming that evolution is a fact like gravity then please give us 100% proof.Quote:
NOT ONCE did anyone demand 100% proof from believers. Just a little objective evidence. So like I said before. Whatever. I don't think anyone is wrong on this board. You guys rough it out. Because the discussion is going no where
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:24 PM. |