The Truth about Mormons

[daws101]

really? how do you proselytize something not existing.

By seeking to convert others to your beliefs, as you do constantly. daws, you are more insistent that others believe as you do, than any other person in this forum.

how'd I know you say that!? like all your assumptions about me it's false.
I have made no attempts to convert anyone...It's not surprising you'd "think" that as you seem to make it your life's work to be disagreeable just for the sake of being disagreeable.

 

[daws101]

[ame=http://youtu.be/A41WZBcmnfc]Bill Maher - Atheism Not a Religion + Mitt Romney in-Law Unbaptism (Real Time New Rules 02-03-2012) - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://youtu.be/k7XUebtJ_Jw]Bill Maher on the hypocrisy of evangelical christians. - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://youtu.be/RY0Y7vQF13U]Real Time - Bill Maher Educates The Tea Party On The Founding Fathers. - YouTube[/ame]

 

[JakeStarkey]

Theists for sure care what other people who don't believe think. That's why they come to my door to try to convert me. You don't see agnostics or atheists doing that, now do you?

Watch the atheists on this thread. They are as big proselytizers for their beliefs as are the evangelicals and fundamentalists for theirs.

really? how do you proselytize something not existing.

Talk to them, not me.

 

[JakeStarkey]

really? how do you proselytize something not existing.

By seeking to convert others to your beliefs, as you do constantly. daws, you are more insistent that others believe as you do, than any other person in this forum.

how'd I know you say that!? like all your assumptions about me it's false.
I have made no attempts to convert anyone...It's not surprising you'd "think" that as you seem to make it your life's work to be disagreeable just for the sake of being disagreeable.

Uncensored and I agree on almost nothing, but on this he is right. If you are attempting to disprove that you cannot prove that God exists or not, then you are proselytizing for agnosticism. No two ways about it.

 

[daws101]

By seeking to convert others to your beliefs, as you do constantly. daws, you are more insistent that others believe as you do, than any other person in this forum.

how'd I know you say that!? like all your assumptions about me it's false.
I have made no attempts to convert anyone...It's not surprising you'd "think" that as you seem to make it your life's work to be disagreeable just for the sake of being disagreeable.

Uncensored and I agree on almost nothing, but on this he is right. If you are attempting to disprove that you cannot prove that God exists or not, then you are proselytizing for agnosticism. No two ways about it.

you're wrong too....I am speaking my mind, if that changes your pov or not it's on you.

 

[JakeStarkey]

If you are speaking your mind I hope you are speaking what you believe.

You just cut the throat of your own argument.

 

[daws101]

If you are speaking your mind I hope you are speaking what you believe.

You just cut the throat of your own argument.

another false assumption .
the argument is yours
why is it theists insist the total opposite of belief is a belief?
is this a factual statement " there is no incontrovertible evidence for or against the existence of god".

 

[JakeStarkey]

If you are speaking your mind I hope you are speaking what you believe.

You just cut the throat of your own argument.

another false assumption .
the argument is yours
why is it theists insist the total opposite of belief is a belief?
is this a factual statement " there is no incontrovertible evidence for or against the existence of god".

Yes, your conclusion is false, Daws. You can believe that a non-belief constitutes the principle that belieivng a null fact is not so.

You will not have the last word, daws, ever, on this argument.

 

[HUGGY]

Theists and atheists are not much concerned at all about what agnostics think, and generally wish them well.

Fence sitters are punks!

 

[JakeStarkey]

Huggy, you have already lost this discussion on other threads on this matter.

 

[HUGGY]

Huggy, you have already lost this discussion on other threads on this matter.

Flakey Jake... Nigga puulleeezzz! I have lost nothing. If all my posts just keeps one person from turning into a jello brained moron that gives up his or her hard earned money to support your criminal enterprises it will have been worth it.

There is no god. Supporting this lie is joining in a criminal enterprise with these frauds.

 

[daws101]

If you are speaking your mind I hope you are speaking what you believe.

You just cut the throat of your own argument.

another false assumption .
the argument is yours
why is it theists insist the total opposite of belief is a belief?
is this a factual statement " there is no incontrovertible evidence for or against the existence of god".

Yes, your conclusion is false, Daws. You can believe that a non-belief constitutes the principle that belieivng a null fact is not so.

You will not have the last word, daws, ever, on this argument.

nice dodge, now answer the question..is this a factual statement " there is no incontrovertible evidence for or against the existence of god"

 

[JakeStarkey]

daws and huggy, both, you believe in what you think is so. That is faith belief. You have fail.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

What a bizarre argument.

God believers cannot prove their god exists. The very definition of "faith" is to put your brain on hold in favor of blind obedience. Those who are unable to do that can never believe in the existence of a god.

Non-believers believe in what they can see, hold in their hand. Their brain and their ability and total belief in logic and hard science gets in the way of "faith".

I don't know if any of the various gods exist but I do know that I believe in facts.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

What a bizarre argument.

God believers cannot prove their god exists. The very definition of "faith" is to put your brain on hold in favor of blind obedience. Those who are unable to do that can never believe in the existence of a god.

Non-believers believe in what they can see, hold in their hand. Their brain and their ability and total belief in logic and hard science gets in the way of "faith".

I don't know if any of the various gods exist but I do know that I believe in facts.

And the FACT is you can not prove God does not exist. Which means your blind belief in something unproven is faith based.

 

[Gadawg73]

NO one can disprove my religious beliefs.
NO one can prove my religious beliefs.
NO one can prove there is a God.
NO one can prove there is not a God.

 

[ima]

That's why anyone with half a brain working would be an agnostic: there is no proof either way, but if someone ever comes up with some real tangible proof either way, I'm open to changing my mind.

 

[LittleNipper]

What a bizarre argument.

God believers cannot prove their god exists. The very definition of "faith" is to put your brain on hold in favor of blind obedience. Those who are unable to do that can never believe in the existence of a god.

Non-believers believe in what they can see, hold in their hand. Their brain and their ability and total belief in logic and hard science gets in the way of "faith".

I don't know if any of the various gods exist but I do know that I believe in facts.

Faith without works is dead. So, if I have faith in the Lord but see none of His works, my faith, which comes from God cannot grow and flourish. But, I do see God's protection. I see God providing for both my family and myself. And I have witnessed God's healing power. You need to seek God and He will give you the faith...

 

[HUGGY]

That's why anyone with half a brain working would be an agnostic: there is no proof either way, but if someone ever comes up with some real tangible proof either way, I'm open to changing my mind.

No evidense is proof of no evidense.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

That's why anyone with half a brain working would be an agnostic: there is no proof either way, but if someone ever comes up with some real tangible proof either way, I'm open to changing my mind.

No evidense is proof of no evidense.

There is No evidence he does not exist as well. So by your logic he must exist.