How did you reach your conclusion

Who said there was?
Nobody needed to. It's common knowledge in some parts of the world.
Dog. that was easy. Let's do another one....This is fun...[/B]


I am a deeply religious man. (Albert Einstein)
I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings. (Albert Einstein)
"In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me for the support of such views."(Einstein)

"I'm not an atheist and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangements of the books, but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God."(Einstein)

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." (Einstein)

In other words he did not believe in a God the same way I do, but still believe there was a creation

We're back to the honesty thing

Yes we are aren't we?

Okay........a dog is NOT an "anti-cat". Why? Both have fur, both have claws and 4 legs, both have tails, and both eat meat.

Matter of fact, in some cases, both animals will co-exist together and exhibit the same behaviors.

But then again, what else can you expect from some Moron who doesn't know much about mathematics?

Try again No Truth Speaker, you're sinking fast.

No not really. Still afloat while the sailor sinks. You are telling me that there are not opposites for everything. The common idea prevails that by and large cats and dogs are enemies. That's what makes them opposites. Why do I feel like I'm instructing a 3 year old?
 
☭proletarian☭;1831107 said:
☭proletarian☭;1831025 said:

Just because I said "belief(the desire)" doesn't mean they are synonymous. I'm simply trying to explain that the desire comes with the belief. Why are you mincing words?


So you don't know how to use parentheses?

This isn't the grammar Nazi thread. And your grammar isn't perfect either. Would you like to contribute to the thread now? Or are you more concerned with being beligerant. Oops I forgot to put a question mark at the end of my last sentence. here come the grammar Gustapo!
 
☭proletarian☭;1831102 said:
No I'll repeat what I said the first time. A dog is the opposite of a cat.... What's wrong with you?


wait.. you say -cat=dog and I call you on it...

then you say you never said that, and that you said -cat=dog

You're really stupid, aren't you?

I never said that and you can't show me anywhere that I did. You're the juvenile moron here. Why are you totally trying to derail the thread?

you keeping quoting it and denying you wrote what you just quoted yourself as writing..

are you confused?
 
Listen idiot........you asked for examples, I gave them to you. Those fuckers were Mormons and they were devout.

Why do people always call others names when they are wrong. it's a pathetic grasp at saving face I guess. Oh well. How devout could they have been if they weren't following the teachings of their own religion which says that Judgment is God's and no others?Also Judge not that ye be not judged.


I thought their praying on the street for the souls of those running nude on the beach was a bit over the top,
I've never even heard of a "Mormon" doing that.


Seems they were uncomfortable around nude people, which really doesn't make very much sense, as the reason God knew Adam and Eve had eaten of the tree was because they were embarrassed by their nakedness, which means that if you are embarrassed of nudity, you are exhibiting original sin.
Some theory you got there. I disagree with it.
I think it's just normal to have clothes on and be uncomfortable if the wacko's around you are naked. Maybe you should move there if you're more comfortable.

And yes THEY DO HAVE TO approve of the foreign customs,

BS. They don't have to approve anything just because they're "in Rome". They just shouldn't do the things they disagree with and shouldn't berate others for doing their customs.

because if they try to force the natives to accept the will of the foreigners (them), they will end up pissing people off.
they didn't have to go carousing or go nude on the beach. Where is your logic?

Nope........try again.
 
A 5 year old boy getting terminal cancer is not an injustice its a travesty that an all powerful, all loving god would not allow, The whole suffer now so you can have bliss later deal is the crap made up by man to control his fellow man and to deal with the hardships of life, you have been sold a bill of goods that is not redeemable.


And why wouldn't he allow it to happen? Why is your conclusion better than mine? At least I have answers that give me peace. You are left with nothing but anger and despair.
I know what it feels like to lose a loved one. Sometimes I imagine the look of pain on my 5 year olds face in nightmares where he is suffering. But what allows me to cope with the possibility of such things is a knowledge of what happens on the other side.

Reality does not give one anger and despair, I'd rather face the truth about life rather than delude myself by pretending a magical guy in the sky was going to make everything turn out okay when life ends.

Well I'm sorry to say we'll have to agree to disagree.
 
My question is, why does life have to end before everything is okay?

Kind of a fucked up situation, don't ya think?

Not at all. You can get some or even most things to be ok with some people in life but never have an absence of suffering in total. But actually it's part of the plan of eternal happiness. It's not all about just this life.
 
☭proletarian☭;1831210 said:
☭proletarian☭;1831102 said:
wait.. you say -cat=dog and I call you on it...

then you say you never said that, and that you said -cat=dog

You're really stupid, aren't you?

I never said that and you can't show me anywhere that I did. You're the juvenile moron here. Why are you totally trying to derail the thread?

you keeping quoting it and denying you wrote what you just quoted yourself as writing..

are you confused?

dog is NOT cat. dog is opposite of cat.:banghead:
 
Tell you what you simpleton........go overseas, spend a few years over there, and THEN come back and tell me about how much more "right" your views are.

And yes, I DID see those idiots praying for someone else's soul because they were offended, not my call, I just know what I saw, and what their religion was as recorded on their Emergency Data page.

But then again, what else could I expect from a close minded asshole such as yourself?
 
That your God/faith or lack thereof was correct?

Thats an interesting question too. I made my journy from atheist to faithist very slowly.

There were several instances in my life about 10 years ago where I should have died, was told that I should be dead, yet survived multiple times. I think my near death experiences are what prompted my search for a power greater than myself.

I think what I believe about a higher power (I consider it the spirits and subconcious mind communicating but its a complex concept so I just call it god to make it easier on everyone else) stemmed from those experiences.

That being said I have a disdain for religion, if not a loathing for it.
 
Tell you what you simpleton........go overseas, spend a few years over there, and THEN come back and tell me about how much more "right" your views are.
The only view I'm trying to put forth is that God created the world. Do you agree or disagree?

And yes, I DID see those idiots praying for someone else's soul because they were offended, not my call, I just know what I saw, and what their religion was as recorded on their Emergency Data page.

Maybe so, but I've never seen such a public display from one of our own before. You should at least know that it's not common.

But then again, what else could I expect from a close minded asshole such as yourself?
to speak the truth Hence the name.
 
☭proletarian☭;1831210 said:
I never said that and you can't show me anywhere that I did. You're the juvenile moron here. Why are you totally trying to derail the thread?

you keeping quoting it and denying you wrote what you just quoted yourself as writing..

are you confused?

dog is NOT cat. dog is opposite of cat.:banghead:

you keep saying -cat=dog

when i say you're a retard, you object and say you really met to say -cat=dog

now you state that cat=/= dog (no fucking shit; we already knew that), but rather -cat=dog


stop hitting your head like that; you've precious few brain cells left.
 
That your God/faith or lack thereof was correct?

Thats an interesting question too. I made my journy from atheist to faithist very slowly.

There were several instances in my life about 10 years ago where I should have died, was told that I should be dead, yet survived multiple times. I think my near death experiences are what prompted my search for a power greater than myself.

I think what I believe about a higher power (I consider it the spirits and subconcious mind communicating but its a complex concept so I just call it god to make it easier on everyone else) stemmed from those experiences.

That being said I have a disdain for religion, if not a loathing for it.

I understand why. I would too if the one I subscribe to didn't exist.
 
Yo.......No Truth Speaker..........exactly where is a cat "opposite" of a dog?

Most of the characteristics of a cat are exactly the SAME as a dog.

Oh wait.......I keep forgetting......you place everything in the narrow bias of your belief system.
 
☭proletarian☭;1830280 said:
☭proletarian☭;1823196 said:
Yet the mountain doesn't exist until someone sees the world in which it resides.

Physics will really fuck with your philosophy.

Great, a tree falling in the forest guy. A guy who at times has argued away his own existence because someone else hasn't seen him. His credibility is therefore nonexistent until someone can actually witness it.:slap:

All things exist in all states until the wave function collapses
I'm sorry prol, but this is where your philosophy just loses all credibility to me. Nothing exists till I experience it.
 
Actually, Fitz, that is one of the concepts of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. The wave exists in all states, UNTIL just one of them is observed.

Then, the wave form collapses and only 1 result is recorded and experienced.

Schrodenger's kitten.
 
☭proletarian☭;1827839 said:
You are implying mutual exclusivity between church/faith and honesty.

And? Faith spells the end of honest consideration of the facts. Just look at the Catholics or the Warmers.

I see no difference between the two, really.

Let's talk about that. How much evidence have you ignored in support of the existence of a God?

Why do you think because you have found one false religion that they are all false? If there is an opposite for everything, there must be a true religion out there somewhere right?

How arrogant of you to say that because Einstein admitted that there was a God, that he was unwilling to honestly consider facts?
Are you smarter than Einstein?
Do you consider yourself privy to information he was not?
How long have you been so self conceited?
Answer me!:popcorn: Still waiting....
Truth... don't be so rough on him. He's already decided that there is nothing supernatural in reality. He has closed off that section of his mind or possibility. You aren't going to be able to communicate on the same levels. He can't understand what you're saying and you can't understand what he's saying because you both come from completely opposite paradigms. I suspect I'm closer to understanding his view, but because of my philosophy I vehemently disagree with his conclusions.
 
Last edited:
Actually, Fitz, that is one of the concepts of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. The wave exists in all states, UNTIL just one of them is observed.

Then, the wave form collapses and only 1 result is recorded and experienced.

Schrodenger's kitten.
So essentially I control how reality will be is the root of this theory.

Then why is it not obeying me?
 

Forum List

Back
Top