Spirituality
03 Jun 15
Originally posted by Ghost of a Dukeneither, its a reflection of you and nothing more. In order for it to be an ad hominem it would need to form part of an argument, for example,
That said, i'm absolutely certain you're a pilchard.
(Does that qualify as an ad hominem attack, or is it merely a statement of absolute truth?)
You are talking pants because you are a pilchard. I may be talking pants but is has little to do with my pilchardness and being a pilchard has little relevance to the efficacy of my talking pants.
Its also cannot be a statement of absolute truth because I am human whereas a pilchard is a fish plus the fact my being pure awesome would negate the statement.
03 Jun 15
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou certainly like to talk about pilchards...
neither, its a reflection of you and nothing more. In order for it to be an ad hominem it would need to form part of an argument, for example,
You are talking pants because you are a pilchard. I may be talking pants but is has little to do with my pilchardness and being a pilchard has little relevance to the efficacy of my talking pants.
Its ...[text shortened]... man whereas a pilchard is a fish plus the fact my being pure awesome would negate the statement.
Originally posted by divegeesterIt is a bit more than a premise, it is borne out by statistics. Although I guess one could argue that there are other reasons for the correlation.
I am interested in this premise that the level of science education one has, (in my words) inversely impacts the propensity to accept the possibility of a deity.
Can you give me an example of something particular in the science or cosmological dimension that you know, that I possibly don't know, that would contribute to me potentially discarding my acceptance of the possibility of a deity?
Its difficult to say without knowing what you know or don't know. And, no, you can't change to 'deity' in the middle of the thread when it suits you. We are talking about a theistic God similar to the Christian or Muslim God, not any random deity.
Any of these should give you serious doubts about a the standard theistic personal God:
1. An understanding of the scientific method and general principles of science.
2. An understanding of physics - especially as it applies to astronomy / cosmology.
3. A good understanding of evolution, the diversity of life and biology.
4. An understanding of the human brain and how it works.
Its hard to pick any one fact because it is a good understanding of the whole that would lead you to the realisation that there is no bearded fellow in the sky meddling with things.
Originally posted by twhiteheadI think I'm beginning to understand why we don't get along well (irrespective of the obvious theological differences). I make an effort to engage with you respectfully despite you being one of the most soulless, charmless, humourless people I've met at RHP since 2008, and you, while focusing on the precision of your response, fail with me because despite my efforts you disrespect me by lacing your responses with comments like "bearded men in the sky" when you know very well that my view of my God is nothing like that whatsoever. I'm way too combatative to sit still for it and I couldn't give a rats ass about your view of the cosmos because you don't give a rats ass about mine.
It is a bit more than a premise, it is borne out by statistics. Although I guess one could argue that there are other reasons for the correlation.
[b]Can you give me an example of something particular in the science or cosmological dimension that you know, that I possibly don't know, that would contribute to me potentially discarding my acceptance of t ...[text shortened]... uld lead you to the realisation that there is no bearded fellow in the sky meddling with things.
04 Jun 15
Originally posted by divegeesterWho else could have created the heavens and the earth and programmed the DNA in all animals and could be responsible for all the miracles in nature?
Are you absolutely certain that God doesn't exist?
Are you absolutely certain that God does exist?
How can you be either of the above?
Originally posted by divegeesterActually, no, I do not know that your view of your God is nothing like that whatsoever. Besides, we are not talking about your view of your God, but all views of theistic Gods.
I think I'm beginning to understand why we don't get along well (irrespective of the obvious theological differences). I make an effort to engage with you respectfully despite you being one of the most soulless, charmless, humourless people I've met at RHP since 2008, and you, while focusing on the precision of your response, fail with me because despite ...[text shortened]... dn't give a rats ass about your view of the cosmos because you don't give a rats ass about mine.
And yes, you are way too combatative and for some reason always blame me. What is more, you always use it as an excuse to call off uncomfortable conversations.
You seem quite happy to carry on endless combative arguments with Robbie, or RJ or any number of other Christians but the moment your beliefs are called into question by me, you call it off.
And in addition, nobody asked you to give a rats ass about my view of the cosmos. You asked me why I am absolutely certain that no theistic God exists and I answered as truthfully and honestly as I could. If you are uninterested in the answer then thats your look out. I suspect however that you are just uncomfortable with the answer and do not wish to discuss it further just as Robbie does not wish to pick up a science book.
Originally posted by twhiteheadI've been posting here for 7 years and you claim that your don't know wether or not I view God as a 'bearded chap in the sky'? I don't believe you.
Actually, no, I do not know that your view of your God is nothing like that whatsoever. Besides, we are not talking about your view of your God, but all views of theistic Gods.
And yes, you are way too combatative and for some reason always blame me. What is more, you always use it as an excuse to call off uncomfortable conversations.
You seem quite h ...[text shortened]... er and do not wish to discuss it further just as Robbie does not wish to pick up a science book.
I'm happy to continue discussing this with you and you don't make the conversation "uncomfortable" as I don't agree with your opinion and world view; perhaps you think your opinion is more powerful than in fact it is.
Originally posted by SuzianneTalking about certainty of belief, absolutism in any form is I think completely on topic in this forum. My (little) scrape with twhitehead is nothing to do with the OP. If you don't want to contribute to this thread and you feel I want to start a fight then why are you in here pouring fuel on the fire?
You're trying to start a fight, is what you're doing.
04 Jun 15
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeI am not certain that God exists but I hope he does. I am not an absolutist and should there be an afterlife and I'm shown to be wrong about my belief in the nature of God I would not be entirely surprised.
I am 'pretty certain' that God doesn't exist.
Only closed minds deal in absolutes.
I also completely accept that despite the wonder of nature, the universe, human beings there is no actual empricial evidence that a God of any nature actually exists. However I observe this and I perceive intelligent design.
I'm generally a bit of a pessimist at work and I'm certainly a rationalist when it comes to commercial decisions. I find myself becoming impatient with those of a more, how shall I put it, eclectic commercial perspective. So I am surprised that I cling to my faith. Or perhaps my faith clings to me.