If you deny that you're making a false assumption right
here in the beginning, then you are clearly the dishonest one.
No, my friend. I understand that you rather attack me than accept your own failures, but you are wrong here. For the first part of that statement for a reason you claimed as your own... for the second part simply because of what you are.
First point: you are not the arbiter of truth. You don't have the authority or the wisdom to simply declare your position as correct, and other positions as incorrect.
You yourself said, in a post that I now quote again, that you can "safely assume", as long as you are not shown wrong.
Why shouldn't I assume that perfect existence can not include the cessation of existence? It seems far more reasonable to assume perfect existence would be just perfect, no reason to cease. Again if you have a reason that perfect existence should cease, please explain it, otherwise I'm safe to assume you're wrong.
So, as long as you cannot give me a reason why I am wrong, I am safe to assume that I am right. Correct? Your reasoning.
Second point: I have a reason for my assumption. You might not like it, you might not want to consider it, but it exists.
Objectively (and honestly): can something be "better" than it is? I say: no, it cannot. The "thing" as it is exists. The "thing" as it is imagine to be - "better" or "more perfect" - does not. If it did, it would
be the better "thing".
Change and extrapolations for future events are no exception or contradiction to that: a "thing" can change. It can even get closer to the
subjective standard of "better" or "more perfect". But at that point, it will again be what it is.
So, nothing can be better than it is. Something that is better than its existing state does not exists. If something cannot be better than it is, it is perfect. All existence is perfect, because nothing else exists.
There you have the reason. My assumption is not false.
Third point: I am not the clearly dishonest one here. I stand by my statements. My statements do not contradict.
My statements and assumptions may be
false... but I do not deliberatly hide that. My statements are based on your standard of objectivity and honesty.
So my assumption is not false because you disagree with me. I am not dishonest because I disagree with you.
I even pointed it out right
here in the beginning in an attempt to keep you from assuming my view of existence as being different than yours. Yet you continued assuming.
And justifiedly so. Our views of "existence" are different.
It is obvious from your postings. You kept talking about "society" or "the perfect society". You talk about the circumstances
within our existence.
I on the other hand made it clear from the start:
No, and this is where we differ. My understandung of "perfect reality" involves only one thing: existence.
Try being honestly objective and just ask questions, don't assume, unless you have good reason to assume, but if your assumptions turn out to be wrong, you'd better be ready to fess up about it, or else risk losing all respect.
I have good reason to assume, thank you. Read above.
And as for "losing all respect" if my assumptions turn out to be wrong... well, if they do, I will "fess up". As yet, you haven't done anything to show they are wrong.
Now you on the other hand have repeatedly contradicted yourself - and I have shown that, with your own words. It is there, for all to read.
Yet it doesn't seem that the threat of "losing all respect" means anything to you. So why should I bother, to hold the respect of someone who isn't worthy of respect?
As a Christian in this fallen world, I don't expect to be loved by those who don't love Christ.
John 15:18-19
"If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you."
Obviously, I don't want you to hate me and I don't think you do at this point, but I do want you to understand what Christians are trying to do and that is express the love of Christ and reveal the truth to those willing to accept it. I'm trying to understand the mind of atheists so I help them understand, but ultimately it comes down to the atheists to accept what they believe is true about life.
And if all fails, play the persecution card. You are not "hated" because you are chosen, or because you are not "of this world"... or even because Jesus was hated.
You are "hated" - in real terms that means "criticized and notified of your errors" - because you are wrong - obviously wrong - and unable to admit it.
