Why do the God-haters persist?

[Boss]

So if someone discovers something new, something you never heard of or imagined, because you don't believe it exists, you cannot evaluate any evidence of it?

If someone claims something exists but you don't believe them, you can never evaluate any new evidence that comes to light?

Once a person holds a belief in something existing or not, that belief is permanent because no new evidence can ever convince them?

Those are examples of what your reasoning on this subject leads to. And of course, there's always the wonderful idea that evidence is not what causes a person to believe a thing exists, rather they believe in a thing and then they see if there is any evidence for it.

You're continuing to miss the logic boat as you try and try to twist the context of what I've said into a pretzel you can refute. It's just really sad, pathetic and desperate. You must have a really boring life, Moonbat.

This is not about discovering something new that you never imagined before. Certainly new discoveries are made all the time where they were never imagined before. The belief in possibility has to first exist before you can objectively evaluate anything as evidence for the possibility. I don't know another way to state that. The fact that you can somehow distort it and twist it out of context to find fault with it, doesn't impress me. It may show that you are a moron incapable of rational thought, or an astute inability to comprehend context, but it doesn't impress me.

My "reasoning" is nothing more than simple logic. Evidence can only be objectively analyzed if you are willing to accept whatever premise the evidence is for. Otherwise, you don't see evidence. How can you have evidence of something you do not believe is possible? It's like seeing something that is invisible... it defies logic. Now you can believe in the possibility of something and not believe there is evidence to support it, but that is where you are confusing the context. I've never made such a ridiculous argument, but by god you're going to try as hard as you can to make that my argument so you can refute it with your brilliance!

Case in point here: I do not believe the Earth is hollow. Absolutely don't believe that is possible in any way. If someone came to me and said, "I want you to look at my evidence to suggest the Earth is hollow..." It wouldn't be objectively viewed by me as "evidence" because I do not believe in the possibility at all. You can show it to me, and I will dismiss it as invalid because I do not believe the Earth can be hollow. It doesn't matter how much you believe the evidence supports the idea, it doesn't matter how compelling you believe the evidence is, MY perception of the so-called "evidence" is, it's not evidence the Earth is hollow. That is never going to change unless I come to believe it might be possible the Earth could be hollow.

Now this "argument" has gone on far too long, and if you still don't comprehend what I am saying, I give up. You're just never going to get it. I think you DO get it, you're just trying to be a dickhead. Why? I have no idea, I guess you like that sort of thing?

 

[Boss]

Do you really want me to quote your post where you say specifically that you have to believe something to accept evidence for it? In context of course, the entire post without editing it?
Let me know if you want that displayed here to clarify your dishonesty. I will be happy to oblige you.

No, what I really want you to do is shut the fuck up and try to move on to a topic of conversation worth discussing instead of continuing to try and distort my words. I've had enough of this and I am not going to keep commenting on it. If you and Moonbat want to jerk each other off in a "victory celebration" be my fucking guest! I'm done with this!

 

[thebrucebeat]

Do you really want me to quote your post where you say specifically that you have to believe something to accept evidence for it? In context of course, the entire post without editing it?
Let me know if you want that displayed here to clarify your dishonesty. I will be happy to oblige you.

No, what I really want you to do is shut the fuck up and try to move on to a topic of conversation worth discussing instead of continuing to try and distort my words. I've had enough of this and I am not going to keep commenting on it. If you and Moonbat want to jerk each other off in a "victory celebration" be my fucking guest! I'm done with this!

Discussing your basic mantra, the basis of most of your posts on these threads is not worth talking about?
You might have a point.
Didn't think you wanted to see that post again.

"My little runaway...
Run, run, run, run, runaway"
(Thanks Del Shannon!)

 

[GISMYS]

GOD haters are nothing new==being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, 30slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful. =Typical of those that choose to reject GOD!!! AND YOU???

 

[thebrucebeat]

So if someone discovers something new, something you never heard of or imagined, because you don't believe it exists, you cannot evaluate any evidence of it?

If someone claims something exists but you don't believe them, you can never evaluate any new evidence that comes to light?

Once a person holds a belief in something existing or not, that belief is permanent because no new evidence can ever convince them?

Those are examples of what your reasoning on this subject leads to. And of course, there's always the wonderful idea that evidence is not what causes a person to believe a thing exists, rather they believe in a thing and then they see if there is any evidence for it.

You're continuing to miss the logic boat as you try and try to twist the context of what I've said into a pretzel you can refute. It's just really sad, pathetic and desperate. You must have a really boring life, Moonbat.

This is not about discovering something new that you never imagined before. Certainly new discoveries are made all the time where they were never imagined before. The belief in possibility has to first exist before you can objectively evaluate anything as evidence for the possibility. I don't know another way to state that. The fact that you can somehow distort it and twist it out of context to find fault with it, doesn't impress me. It may show that you are a moron incapable of rational thought, or an astute inability to comprehend context, but it doesn't impress me.

My "reasoning" is nothing more than simple logic. Evidence can only be objectively analyzed if you are willing to accept whatever premise the evidence is for. Otherwise, you don't see evidence. How can you have evidence of something you do not believe is possible? It's like seeing something that is invisible... it defies logic. Now you can believe in the possibility of something and not believe there is evidence to support it, but that is where you are confusing the context. I've never made such a ridiculous argument, but by god you're going to try as hard as you can to make that my argument so you can refute it with your brilliance!

Case in point here: I do not believe the Earth is hollow. Absolutely don't believe that is possible in any way. If someone came to me and said, "I want you to look at my evidence to suggest the Earth is hollow..." It wouldn't be objectively viewed by me as "evidence" because I do not believe in the possibility at all. You can show it to me, and I will dismiss it as invalid because I do not believe the Earth can be hollow. It doesn't matter how much you believe the evidence supports the idea, it doesn't matter how compelling you believe the evidence is, MY perception of the so-called "evidence" is, it's not evidence the Earth is hollow. That is never going to change unless I come to believe it might be possible the Earth could be hollow.

Now this "argument" has gone on far too long, and if you still don't comprehend what I am saying, I give up. You're just never going to get it. I think you DO get it, you're just trying to be a dickhead. Why? I have no idea, I guess you like that sort of thing?

But that isn't what you said in the post I am happy to cite for you.
You said you actually have to believe something before you can accept evidence for it. Not that it is possible, but that you have to believe it.
You keep trying to craft your argument to have it make sense as it gets perforated repeatedly, subtly changing it to cover the idiocy of where you have come from.
You've been busted, and that is always embarrassing.
We understand.
Paradigm shifts come hard. (Remember avoiding that one twice?)

 

[thebrucebeat]

GOD haters are nothing new==being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, 30slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful. =Typical of those that choose to reject GOD!!! AND YOU???

People indwelt with the Holy Spirit display these traits, according to Paul in Galatians.

Peace, love, joy, patience, goodness, kindness, faithfulness, gentleness and self control.

AND YOU???

 

[koshergrl]

The God-haters persist on this site because they are given a forum and protection to promote hatred and bigotry against Christians....a protection which is NOT extended to Christians on this site.

It's called "Religion and Ethics" and it has a special set of rules...that only applies to Christians.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/relig...uls-stalking-the-oso-mudslide-disgusting.html

http://www.usmessageboard.com/religion-and-ethics/348023-what-exactly-are-christian-values.html

http://www.usmessageboard.com/relig...stian-right-thinks-causes-kids-to-be-gay.html

http://www.usmessageboard.com/relig...reationists-confused-about-fossils-again.html

http://www.usmessageboard.com/relig...st-the-pope-confesses-his-sins-in-public.html

http://www.usmessageboard.com/religion-and-ethics/347167-you-are-a-soul.html

 

[thebrucebeat]

The God-haters persist on this site because they are given a forum and protection to promote hatred and bigotry against Christians....a protection which is NOT extended to Christians on this site.

It's called "Religion and Ethics" and it has a special set of rules...that only applies to Christians.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/relig...uls-stalking-the-oso-mudslide-disgusting.html

http://www.usmessageboard.com/religion-and-ethics/348023-what-exactly-are-christian-values.html

My brief experience here is that the believers dish out as hard if not harder than they get.
Same forum, same protections.
You have a need to feel persecuted.
It's cute.

 

[koshergrl]

Your brief experience counts for exactly nothing.

My extensive experience here is that attacks on Christians is encouraged and supported by multiple mods, who allow them to post garbage that is diametrically opposed to the stated rules in particular forums.

The Religion and Ethics forum, for example. Go read the rules, then read the first page of Huggy's "Goul" thread.

 

[GISMYS]

TAKE NOTE!!!==Last week Raymond Cardinal Burke, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the Vatican City State, caused quite a stir. He told a Polish magazine, "The president of the United States has become progressively more hostile toward Christian civilization. He appears to be a totally secularized man who aggressively promotes anti-life and anti-family policies."

 

[thebrucebeat]

Your brief experience counts for exactly nothing.

My extensive experience here is that attacks on Christians is encouraged and supported by multiple mods, who allow them to post garbage that is diametrically opposed to the stated rules in particular forums.

The Religion and Ethics forum, for example. Go read the rules, then read the first page of Huggy's "Goul" thread.

Thanks for validating my experiences.
Your respect sure is appreciated.
Christian love is always so inspiring.

 

[Montrovant]

So if someone discovers something new, something you never heard of or imagined, because you don't believe it exists, you cannot evaluate any evidence of it?

If someone claims something exists but you don't believe them, you can never evaluate any new evidence that comes to light?

Once a person holds a belief in something existing or not, that belief is permanent because no new evidence can ever convince them?

Those are examples of what your reasoning on this subject leads to. And of course, there's always the wonderful idea that evidence is not what causes a person to believe a thing exists, rather they believe in a thing and then they see if there is any evidence for it.

You're continuing to miss the logic boat as you try and try to twist the context of what I've said into a pretzel you can refute. It's just really sad, pathetic and desperate. You must have a really boring life, Moonbat.

This is not about discovering something new that you never imagined before. Certainly new discoveries are made all the time where they were never imagined before. The belief in possibility has to first exist before you can objectively evaluate anything as evidence for the possibility. I don't know another way to state that. The fact that you can somehow distort it and twist it out of context to find fault with it, doesn't impress me. It may show that you are a moron incapable of rational thought, or an astute inability to comprehend context, but it doesn't impress me.

My "reasoning" is nothing more than simple logic. Evidence can only be objectively analyzed if you are willing to accept whatever premise the evidence is for. Otherwise, you don't see evidence. How can you have evidence of something you do not believe is possible? It's like seeing something that is invisible... it defies logic. Now you can believe in the possibility of something and not believe there is evidence to support it, but that is where you are confusing the context. I've never made such a ridiculous argument, but by god you're going to try as hard as you can to make that my argument so you can refute it with your brilliance!

Case in point here: I do not believe the Earth is hollow. Absolutely don't believe that is possible in any way. If someone came to me and said, "I want you to look at my evidence to suggest the Earth is hollow..." It wouldn't be objectively viewed by me as "evidence" because I do not believe in the possibility at all. You can show it to me, and I will dismiss it as invalid because I do not believe the Earth can be hollow. It doesn't matter how much you believe the evidence supports the idea, it doesn't matter how compelling you believe the evidence is, MY perception of the so-called "evidence" is, it's not evidence the Earth is hollow. That is never going to change unless I come to believe it might be possible the Earth could be hollow.

Now this "argument" has gone on far too long, and if you still don't comprehend what I am saying, I give up. You're just never going to get it. I think you DO get it, you're just trying to be a dickhead. Why? I have no idea, I guess you like that sort of thing?

As has been said more than once, if you would remain consistent in your premise, this argument wouldn't be happening.

However, since you continually vacillate between a person needing to believe something is possible and a person needing to believe something exists before evidence can be examined, you have made your own bed here.

So if a person believes spiritual nature is a possibility, but does not yet believe it exists, they can objectively examine the evidence. I've agreed with that premise more than once. You have stated that basic premise more than once. Yet, for some reason, you continue to backtrack to someone having to believe in spiritual nature, not just the possibility of it, in order to objectively examine the evidence. Those are two separate things you have been using interchangeably.

You do not have to accept a premise to see something as evidence. You can consider it unconvincing evidence, but evidence nonetheless. You can see a thing as evidence of something but not be convinced it is the thing someone else believes.

You are the one doing the twisting in continually changing your statement. On the one hand you say that belief in the possibility of a thing is the requirement to objectively examine evidence, then on the other you say that belief in the thing is required. You can't have it both ways. Either one needs only believe something is possible, or they must already believe a thing exists.

Is it objective to view evidence if you must have a preconceived idea of what the evidence means?

Oh, and as to your hollow Earth example : while for the most part I agree, I also think that it is possible for compelling enough evidence to convince someone of something they didn't believe possible. So, if you don't believe a hollow Earth is possible, but someone digs a tunnel to that hollow core and you travel there with them, you may change what you believe is possible based on the evidence. Maybe there wouldn't be enough evidence to convince you, but that doesn't mean the same is true of everyone. The type of evidence or the amount of it can be important. I don't know why you continue to assume that one must change their belief about something before evidence can convince them of it rather than the evidence changing their belief.

 

[koshergrl]

Yes, it's so unchristian to point out bigotry and hatred.

Thanks for your input, noob. It means a lot!

 

[BreezeWood]

Animals do not Worship God, nor do I. ... it is a waste of time.

Good for you! ...I disagree.

Boss: I don't belong to a religion ...

on what basis do you disagree ?

.

 

[BreezeWood]

koshergirl: The God-haters persist on this site because ...

GISMYS: GOD haters are nothing new==being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; ...

Boss: We see them here everyday, interjecting their hate-filled insultuous attacks on the religious, mocking and ridiculing to a bizarre extreme, anything and everything to do with God ...

show where anyone that is not religious have "hated" God -

it is a fallacy promoted by the OP that can not and has not been substantiated and is in fact the opposite of reality - the use of a religion that undermines the associated God.

.

 

[Steven_R]

GOD haters are nothing new==being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, 30slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful. =Typical of those that choose to reject GOD!!! AND YOU???

People indwelt with the Holy Spirit display these traits, according to Paul in Galatians.

Peace, love, joy, patience, goodness, kindness, faithfulness, gentleness and self control.

AND YOU???

So I can't be a decent person if I don't believe in a Bronze Age mythologies? Is the reverse also true then, that I can do no evil provided I do believe in those same Bronze Age mythologies?

 

[thebrucebeat]

GOD haters are nothing new==being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, 30slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful. =Typical of those that choose to reject GOD!!! AND YOU???

People indwelt with the Holy Spirit display these traits, according to Paul in Galatians.

Peace, love, joy, patience, goodness, kindness, faithfulness, gentleness and self control.

AND YOU???

So I can't be a decent person if I don't believe in a Bronze Age mythologies? Is the reverse also true then, that I can do no evil provided I do believe in those same Bronze Age mythologies?

Of course you can!
That was directed at GYSMYS, who wants to admonish everyone but doesn't display these traits, even though he is an avowed believer. He has no interest in what scripture actually instructs him to be.
I'm on your team, generally.

 

[daws101]

Well, I did not copy and paste my remarks from a third-party source like you did. In my own words, I said: except mathematics, and even that is only proven in our current understanding of reality in our known universe. You somehow deduce it is a "gotchya" moment because your copy-n-paste definition says: except for Mathematics, and even their proofs are relative to localized systems.

I'm not sure if you are comprehending this, but "relative to localized systems" and "reality in our known universe" are practically the same thing. I mean, it's not identical, but mine is my own words and yours is a copy/paste from someone smarter than you.

false! more tantruming....
odd that "your" words are an exact word for word quote just be caused you memorized them does not make them yours...
hers another example of you misrepresenting for your own "Theory" : "relative to localized systems" and "reality in our known universe" are practically the same thing."
boosy

ah no they are not .....you've reinvented what localized systems are to fit your nonsense in the same way you attempted to bullshit that hot water is not hot by using the impracticable faux comparison that since it's not as hot as the sun it's not hot..
as to you being smarter than I Am....truly smart people do not need to proclaim they are...they just are....
also, making word soup as you do is more evidence of your denseness..
truly smart people are direct and choose the right words even if they are not theirs.
anyone can yammer and you have a black belt in yammering...

I didn't "memorize" anything dawsy, I learned this a long time ago,

boosy's rationalizing has been edited.....
I didn't "memorize" anything dawsy, I learned this a long time ago,-boosy
if the above is not :mem·o·rize[ mémmə r̄̀z ]
learn and remember something: to commit something to memory..
then what is it ......!

 

[koshergrl]

GOD haters are nothing new==being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, 30slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful. =Typical of those that choose to reject GOD!!! AND YOU???

People indwelt with the Holy Spirit display these traits, according to Paul in Galatians.

Peace, love, joy, patience, goodness, kindness, faithfulness, gentleness and self control.

AND YOU???

So I can't be a decent person if I don't believe in a Bronze Age mythologies? Is the reverse also true then, that I can do no evil provided I do believe in those same Bronze Age mythologies?

Stop, you're confusing duhs. She fought over a period of days (and I think WEEKS) declaring that the Bronze Age occurred in the 16th century.

She fought hard and valiantly, but eventually had to give up her idiocy. But right now she's thinking "What mythologies of the 1500s is he talking about?" Because despite everything, I imagine she already has reverted to believing the Bronze Age took place in 1559.

 

[daws101]

off topic.....