South Africa Flag logo

South African Skeptics

November 13, 2019, 01:59:41 AM
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
Go to mobile page.
News: Follow saskeptics on twitter.
   
   Skeptic Forum Board Index   Help Forum Rules Search GoogleTagged Login Register Chat Blogroll  
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 10   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic:

Steve on 702

 (Read 22815 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Rigil Kent
Clotting Factor
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +19/-3
Offline Offline

Posts: 2460


Three men make a tiger.


« Reply #45 on: September 13, 2010, 18:50:57 PM »

Seriously, do you really think God is some physical, material being?

Aw, you tease us, Tele! Everyone knows that God is pure energy. Just like Adam who was made in his image. Hey, isn't Theology fun! Grin

Mintaka
Logged
Teleological
Moderate Realist
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +2/-28
Offline Offline

Posts: 980

Ex Nihilo Nihil Fit


« Reply #46 on: September 13, 2010, 19:48:32 PM »

I haven't met Everyone, but this chap seems confused Cheesy.
Logged
Mefiante
Defollyant Iconoclast
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +61/-9
Offline Offline

Posts: 3755


In solidarity with rwenzori: Κοπρος φανεται


WWW
« Reply #47 on: September 13, 2010, 20:38:05 PM »

Hey, isn't Theology fun! Grin
Yup, it’s like a more seedy Mills and Boon for prepubescent retards: tediously long on flowery promises of sweaty romance but disappointingly short on climax.

'Luthon64
Logged
Teleological
Moderate Realist
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +2/-28
Offline Offline

Posts: 980

Ex Nihilo Nihil Fit


« Reply #48 on: September 13, 2010, 20:41:19 PM »

Hey, isn't Theology fun! Grin
Yup, it’s like a more seedy Mills and Boon for prepubescent retards: tediously long on flowery promises of sweaty romance but disappointingly short on climax.

'Luthon64
Mmm, at least you seem to know a lot more about Mills and Boon than theology/philosophy/metaphysics/religion. I wonder why though.... Tongue
Logged
Rigil Kent
Clotting Factor
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +19/-3
Offline Offline

Posts: 2460


Three men make a tiger.


« Reply #49 on: September 13, 2010, 20:50:08 PM »

I haven't met Everyone, but this chap seems confused Cheesy.

Yes, I'm afraid Everyone is rather confused. Everyone has a hard time understanding how everything that can be conceived must automatically also exist. Huh?

Mintaka
Logged
Teleological
Moderate Realist
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +2/-28
Offline Offline

Posts: 980

Ex Nihilo Nihil Fit


« Reply #50 on: September 13, 2010, 20:58:11 PM »

I haven't met Everyone, but this chap seems confused Cheesy.

Yes, I'm afraid Everyone is rather confused. Everyone has a hard time understanding how everything that can be conceived must automatically also exist. Huh?

Mintaka
Everyone is indeed confused.
Logged
Rigil Kent
Clotting Factor
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +19/-3
Offline Offline

Posts: 2460


Three men make a tiger.


« Reply #51 on: September 13, 2010, 21:19:28 PM »

Everyone is indeed confused.

Yes, I think that is now well established. Care for a peanut?

Mintaka

Logged
Mefiante
Defollyant Iconoclast
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +61/-9
Offline Offline

Posts: 3755


In solidarity with rwenzori: Κοπρος φανεται


WWW
« Reply #52 on: September 13, 2010, 22:20:54 PM »

Mmm, at least you seem to know a lot more about Mills and Boon than theology/philosophy/metaphysics/religion. I wonder why though.... Tongue
Wonder no more, dear chap!  It’s that whosoever disagrees with you is obviously and severely deficient in understanding.  Simple, right?

(Parenthetical ETA:  Of course, that does mean that the entire forum with one notable exception is obviously and severely deficient in understanding.)

'Luthon64
Logged
Teleological
Moderate Realist
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +2/-28
Offline Offline

Posts: 980

Ex Nihilo Nihil Fit


« Reply #53 on: September 14, 2010, 06:59:17 AM »

Mmm, at least you seem to know a lot more about Mills and Boon than theology/philosophy/metaphysics/religion. I wonder why though.... Tongue
Wonder no more, dear chap!  It’s that whosoever disagrees with you is obviously and severely deficient in understanding.  Simple, right?

(Parenthetical ETA:  Of course, that does mean that the entire forum with one notable exception is obviously and severely deficient in understanding.)

'Luthon64
To put it simply, like prepubescent retards, you seem to know more about Mills and Boon than theology/philosophy/metaphysics/religion. Hey, you might not be obviously and severely deficient in understanding theology/philosophy/metaphysics/religion, but your Mills and Boon trumps that hands down anyway... Tongue
Logged
StevoMuso
Stevo Muso
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +4/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 654



« Reply #54 on: September 14, 2010, 08:07:28 AM »

Lol, that does not imply God exists in a physical sense with physical, touchable parts. Unless of course you accept it in the fundamentalist literal way. You are no better than those people who interpret Genesis that the universe is not older than 10 000 years if it is the case. It's called a theophany.
... Not a physical being that is touchable, observable (through the senses) or some energy or whatever. Seriously, do you really think God is some physical, material being?
... Do you understand that the Cartesian dualistic or peripatetic understandings of the soul are not incompatible with a dead body and a purely subsistent (complete or incomplete substance) soul? Do you understand the arguments from the Cartesian dualistic as well as the peripatetic understanding of the soul?
Against my better judgement I will attempt one more time to explain things to you Tele. I don't believe in God. I am an atheist. But any discussion on "God" needs a definition. I used the Christian one (which clearly differs from yours) that God is real (not "immaterial") as the God I would set out to disprove. Jesus was caught up to Heaven PHYSICALLY if you recall, and now sits at the right hand of God. And I don't "believe in a 10,000 (or 6,000) year old earth" either. That would be the Biblical explanation, which I show to be INcorrect. And why do you keep on about "Cartesian blah and peripatetic blah-blah." All I said is that my study of the human brain and nervous system showed me that there is no part of us that survives death. Whatever you call that part is your own problem, but our culture calls this thing a "soul". This is my last attempt to explain this to you. Anybody else get it?
Logged
Mefiante
Defollyant Iconoclast
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +61/-9
Offline Offline

Posts: 3755


In solidarity with rwenzori: Κοπρος φανεται


WWW
« Reply #55 on: September 14, 2010, 08:19:05 AM »

Anybody else get it?
Well, yes, it’s how Teleological’s “constructive and positive input” works in practice, a notion he has beat his chest about rather excessively of late.

'Luthon64
Logged
Teleological
Moderate Realist
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +2/-28
Offline Offline

Posts: 980

Ex Nihilo Nihil Fit


« Reply #56 on: September 14, 2010, 08:21:08 AM »

Lol, that does not imply God exists in a physical sense with physical, touchable parts. Unless of course you accept it in the fundamentalist literal way. You are no better than those people who interpret Genesis that the universe is not older than 10 000 years if it is the case. It's called a theophany.
... Not a physical being that is touchable, observable (through the senses) or some energy or whatever. Seriously, do you really think God is some physical, material being?
... Do you understand that the Cartesian dualistic or peripatetic understandings of the soul are not incompatible with a dead body and a purely subsistent (complete or incomplete substance) soul? Do you understand the arguments from the Cartesian dualistic as well as the peripatetic understanding of the soul?
Against my better judgement I will attempt one more time to explain things to you Tele. I don't believe in God. I am an atheist. But any discussion on "God" needs a definition. I used the Christian one (which clearly differs from yours) that God is real (not "immaterial") as the God I would set out to disprove. Jesus was caught up to Heaven PHYSICALLY if you recall, and now sits at the right hand of God. And I don't "believe in a 10,000 (or 6,000) year old earth" either. That would be the Biblical explanation, which I show to be INcorrect. And why do you keep on about "Cartesian blah and peripatetic blah-blah." All I said is that my study of the human brain and nervous system showed me that there is no part of us that survives death. Whatever you call that part is your own problem, but our culture calls this thing a "soul". This is my last attempt to explain this to you. Anybody else get it?
Several problems there Steve.
1) The Christian view of God (as well as classical theism) view God as real, actual as well as an immaterial, non-physical, spiritual being. Like I pointed out, theophany is the word you are looking for and also read up on "analogy of being". You are not representing the Christian view of God, you are making and tearing down straw men.
2) The Bible gives no age of the earth and to say that the Biblical explanation for the age is 6-10 thousand years is a lie. The Bible is also not a science book.
3) Your understanding of the various arguments for a soul seems severely lacking. You give no argument as to why either the Cartesian or peripatetic views are logically incompatible with neurology or neurobiology, just mere assertion.
« Last Edit: September 14, 2010, 08:37:12 AM by Teleological » Logged
Lilli
Sr. Member
****

Skeptical ability: +3/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 435



Lelani Stolp
« Reply #57 on: September 14, 2010, 08:35:25 AM »

Several problems there Steve.
1) The Christian view of God (as well as classical theism) view God as real, actual and immaterial, non-physical, spiritual being. Like I pointed out, theophany is the word you are looking for and also read up on "analogy of being". You are not representing the Christian view of God, you are making and tearing down straw men.
2) The Bible gives no age of the earth and to say that the Biblical explanation for the age is 6-10 thousand years is a lie. The Bible is also not a science book.
3) Your understanding of the various arguments for a soul seems severely lacking. You give no argument as to why either the Cartesian or peripatetic views are logically incompatible with neurology or neurobiology, just mere assertion.
1) OK so how do you explain something that is, as you say, "real and actual" as being at the same time "non-physical"? I don't get it? Please elaborate using words that I don't need a dictionary for, Teleological, obviously I am not as clever as you are and I therefore ask that you explain this to me very simply and preferably in short.
2) True, the bible does not at any point say "the earth will celebrate it's 6000th birthday in the year 2010" or whatever, but biblical scholars, as far as I can understand, use the historical accounts of people and events described in the bible to come up with that theory of theirs that the earth is not as old as geological evidence suggests. Is that more or less accurate or am I missing something again? As for the bible not being a science book, fair enough. I just find it interesting that Christians, when it suits them, says that the bible is allegorical and not meant to be taken literally, and then they do use 'facts' from the bible to explain stuff when that is their goal. Point: the bible is used inconsistently as a means to justify whatever religious folk need justified, and I think that is cheating.
3) I do not know and do not particularly want to know what Cartesian or peripatetic (pathetic?) views refer to. It is however clear to me that the idea that there might be something like a soul that flies up to heaven and exists eternally there or gets reincarnated into another body or whatever after we die is logically inconsistent with what little I know about the human brain.
Logged
StevoMuso
Stevo Muso
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +4/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 654



« Reply #58 on: September 14, 2010, 08:41:11 AM »

Several problems there Steve.
1) The Christian view of God (as well as classical theism) view God as real, actual and immaterial, non-physical, spiritual being. Like I pointed out, theophany is the word you are looking for and also read up on "analogy of being". You are not representing the Christian view of God, you are making and tearing down straw men.
2) The Bible gives no age of the earth and to say that the Biblical explanation for the age is 6-10 thousand years is a lie. The Bible is also not a science book.
3) Your understanding of the various arguments for a soul seems severely lacking. You give no argument as to why either the Cartesian or peripatetic views are logically incompatible with neurology or neurobiology, just mere assertion.
1. So the Christian view is not Biblical then?
2. The Bible clearly gives the 7-day creation story followed by the generations from Adam to Noah, from Noah to David, and from David to Jesus. Roughly 4000 years. Or are you saying the Bible is not to be taken as truth? Well I am - I say the Biblical account is inconsistent with current knowledge and is a badly fabricated myth.
3. I did not set out to disprove various arguments for the soul Tele. That would be for intellectuals like yourself. I merely point out that believing in an afterlife is inconsistent with current medical knowledge of the brain. My book is not a philosophical rebuttal of other philosophical mumbo-jumbo - it's a practical guide to atheism for the average person. You wanna do the philosophical stuff? Be my guest - but it's not for me nor is it the norm for most people.
Logged
Mefiante
Defollyant Iconoclast
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +61/-9
Offline Offline

Posts: 3755


In solidarity with rwenzori: Κοπρος φανεται


WWW
« Reply #59 on: September 14, 2010, 08:43:00 AM »

Fascinating.  So once again Teleological comes to his god’s rescue simply by declaring – without any evidence, it should be noted – that what Christians-turned-atheist believed about their god is simply wrong, and never you mind that the vast majority of run-of-the-mill religious believers continue to have it equally wrong.  Oh, and that all those who have it wrong according to Teleological, are and always have been wrestling with various straw men.

That looks remarkably like teleological grabbing at straws to save a bankrupt idea, if you ask me.

'Luthon64
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 10   Go Up
  Print  


 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Page created in 0.879 seconds with 23 sceptic queries.
Google visited last this page February 11, 2019, 19:31:14 PM
Privacy Policy