The defeated, the undefeated and the proud (invite only)

Kylie · May 16, 2019

the iconoclast said:
Kylie - "And since the evidence for my dragon is the same as the evidence for your Jesus, you should, no doubt, now firmly believe that the dragon in my backyard exists, right?"

I do not believe the evidence is comparable when i consider how you responded so far. Lets get into a little more.

A comparison is being made between belief in a dragon deity who you made up recently - a deity you do not even believe exists.

Compared to a belief in Jesus Christ who is proclaimed Son Of God and is claimed to be the reconciliation between man and God. Jesus has been believed by many for nearly 2000 years and belief in the God of Abraham since 23rd/22nd bc (.eg 4000yrs)

I don't know how you got the idea that the Dragon was made up by me. I never said such a thing.

Lets start with 3 examples i want you to consider.

1. Time is an interesting note here as your dragon deity "is what allows life and the universe itself to exist." Conservatively, a belief in the God of Abraham has been in existance for just over 4000 yrs and has multiple historic documents, and accounts.

This is the first time i have heard of this dragon deity with these attributes and no one edore has claimed anything similar.

How do you account for this discrepancy?

Why do you assume that any kind of deity MUST make itself known to all Humans?

2. There were 12 disciples and 4 gospels. These 4 document - whether true or false, that is a matter of trust either way - are still witnesses for the crucifixion of Jesus and His teachings.

Compared to a dragon deity who pops thoughts into your head, you have no other witnesses or historical documents. What do you think here and please give me more than just one sentence. I want you to perform!

If they are false, then they are evidence of nothing.

And again you seem to think you have some cause to believe that the Dragon is a figment of my imagination, when you have no such evidence.

3. I have no extra incentive to consider your deity. Your deity blesses, so does mine. Your deity gives you joy, so does mine. Your deity cannot secure my afterlife yet is the reason for life and the universe.

From all your explanations so far i come to the conclusion that your deity wasnt thought through very well and i have no need for him.

So if a person tells you that they have a deity that brings them joy, do you believe them or not? WHy does it depend on whether the deity is one that you already have a belief in? That seems like a double standard to me - you'll believe if it suits you to believe.

We have far more sources for Jesus of Nazareth than we do for many historical figures in the first century. We have at least 18. Twelve of those are non-Christian sources

There are no reliable contemporary sources for Jesus. And yet you are speaking with a woman who has experienced the Dragon first hand right now. How can you claim that it's the same thing? You have direct access to an eyewitness to the Dragon.

As for the Scriptures, Prof. Darrell Bock of the Dallas Theological Seminary explained that any piece of a surviving ancient work is called a manuscript. And more ancient pages or fragments of the Bible have survived by far than any other book from antiquity.

Irrelevant. Are the fragments written by people who were there? Do they come from the same time period as the events they describe? The fact they are old by itself means nothing.

So far You have me told about the Dragon but the comparison falls short and in no way comparable to Jesus. Last chance what more can this dragon deity whom you preach offer me compared to Christ. I still need convincing?

What if I turned it around? What if I asked you what Jesus can offer me that the Dragon can't? What would you say?

Where did i say that?

Post 21:

the iconoclast said:
You convinced me.

I now believe there is an invisible dragon in your backyard who rewards faith with treasures of all sorts.

What do you think about a historical Jesus?

I think that there is insufficient evidence to support the existence of a historical Jesus.

The 'something better' you want to happen is to be able to measure God in a similar way to the volume and weight value for some water. Someone does a similar method to you and should get the same measurements for confirmation and comparison?

In the sense that I want some method for measuring God that is reliable. If you and I measure the chemical composition of water, we will get the same results. Anyone else who measures it will get the same results as both of us. I want a test for God that likewise produces identical results for all people who conduct the test.

What particular examples of measurements of God are you looking for?

Well, the Bible gives us a good example:

Matthew 17:20: For truly, I say to you, if you have faith like a grain of mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move, and nothing will be impossible for you.

If God does not exist in our universe, what good is a test that applys to physical and earthly things?

If God does not exist in our universe, how could he have done any of the things attributed to him in the Bible. If you take the Bible as fact, then God has interacted with our universe. Such interactions can be measured.

Give it a shot and have a think about it, how can we test the supernatural? How did you prove to your self that ghosts do not exist?

Why do you assume the default position is that ghosts DO exist?

Shouldn't we start with the assumption that nothing exists until we have sufficient evidence for it? Otherwise we'd be stuck believing in all sorts of weird nonsense. I could just as well ask you how you proved that the Dragon does not exist.

But once we start out as I suggested, the question becomes, "How did you prove to your self that ghosts do exist?" And when we get an answer to that question, we can see if the evidence holds up to investigation.

Right now it is estimated that there are 2.2 billion Christians and of that there are 280 million pentecostals. Pentecostals are growing faster than most denominations, what does that mean when we consider testing, replication and accuracy?

It means that out of 7.5 Billion people in the world, 5.3 billion think the Pentecostals are wrong. The numbers game does not support religion.

But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.
John 14:26

Which does not fit what happened to me when I tried to believe.

When the Advocate comes, whom I will send to you from the Father—the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father—he will testify about me.
John 15:26

Which does not fit what happened to me when I tried to believe.

Lets look at spirital gifts as evidence. What do you think about speaking in tongues and divine healing as evidence?

How do I determine the difference between someone speaking in tongues and someone just speaking nonsense gibberish?

And can you show me a case of a legitimate faith healer?

No my friend this is not adequate. Ive put forward the chatge that have made a category error and i gave my reasons, could you show me why this/your line of reasoning is not a category error?

You are assuming it belongs in a separate category but you have not shown that this required category exists.

You wanted the truth. So you didnt want to try to appease your husband and you didnt do it with all your being and had 100% faith in Jesus?

Your search started off on the wrong foot. You had no faith, we have discovered your first issue with coming to Christ, you did not have trust or belief to begin with. You did not do what is needed and maybe you never will?

No, I did not start off on the wrong foot. I started off wanting the truth. I need evidence before I believe. I'm not going to believe in something without good reason to believe.

Lets say we see some facts.

There is a body, a knife in someones back and a pool of blood. What here would be considered evidence, beliefand sufficient reason? What would bias motivate here?

Would you consider yourself biased based on your beliefs and if not, why not?

Fingerprints on the knife, DNA left at the scene, etc.

Not sure what your point here is...

If it is 6000 years old, 6 billion years old or 6 mins to early it does not effect the doctrine of salvation and im happy to accept either.

Of course, if the universe is 6 minutes old, then Jesus couldn't have been cricified centuries ago, and thus your salvation doesn't exist, but hey...

This is the single objective truth you speak of, Got any others?

Nah, you've just made the claim. Telling me that it's an objective truth means nothing - you gotta SHOW me that it's the truth, and so far you haven't been able to do that at all.

Subduction Zone · May 16, 2019

the iconoclast said:
Hey hey my dear ;p

There are ways in which Jesus and this dragon deity are dissimilar when we consider accepting a statement of (someone) as true.

Kylie does not actually believe the dragon exists or actually had an experience with the dragon. If she does not believe in this dragon and she is the only source for said dragon then why should i believe it?

Cheers

That is a difference without distinction. She may not believe in her dragon, but there are other religions where people have their own "dragons".

Kylie · May 17, 2019

the iconoclast said:
What are these different results? I will need some examples that you are aware of but in the mean while lets try it out.

The many different branches of Christianity. I mean, if they all agreed with each other, why so many different versions?

Would you call this an absolute certainty?

Certain enough to be sure it's accurate.

Would you say that when anyone reads the Bible, The God of Abraham cannot exist because a consenus cannot be acheived with a uniform conclusion as to what God wants and who He is?

When i first read the Bible as a young man came to this conclusion very easily and with no confusion

Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these twocommandments hang all the law and the prophets.

Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truthand the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

Dont steal, murder, worship any other Gods - dragons that live in backyards included - disrespect parents, bear false witness, make idols, keep sabbath holy, take the Lords name in vain, commit adultery and dont be envious of your neighbour.

God created the earth and the universe.

I mention these as a starting point. What different result did you get?

Well, for a start, I don't just believe claims that are made unless there is evidence to support them. And the more extraordinary the claim, the more extraordinary the evidence required.

Im pentecostal, i attend a Methodist church and our church has a relationship with many other denoms. Most denoms are united on what matters, Jesus is the Son of God who was born, died and ressurected.

Yeah, but the Devil's in the details, isn't it?

I put you under oath by the living God to tell us whether you are the Christ, the Son of God!” (Matthew 26:63)

Now all these things are from God, who reconciled us to Himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation, namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation.
2 cor 5:18

"I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me.
Gal 2:20

For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.
1cor 12:13

This is the only thing I want to find out from you: did you receive the Spirit by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh? Did you suffer so many things in vain--if indeed it was in vain?read more.
Gal 3:2-5

For this reason I have sent to you Timothy, my son whom I love, who is faithful in the Lord. He will remind you of my way of life in Christ Jesus, which agrees with what I teach everywhere in every church
1 cor 4

This is the objective truth. Are you suggesting these words are too complicated for anyone to come to a firm conclusion?

No, I'm saying that you haven't shown these words to be objective truth.

I dont know if you noticed but humans always find a way to disagree. Even in the same political parties and clubs. A persons ability to understand words and cultural aspects of a historical society - and document - does not mean theres is no objective truth in the Bible.

But this disagreement never occurs when it comes to the composition of water. You never get one person saying it's water and oxygen, and the other guy insisting that it's uranium and xenon because he feels it really strongly.

Kylie - "They got different branches of Christianity and started killing each other because of it."

I assume you are referring to Protestant and Catholoc issues or the mormon wars? What point would you like to make here?

That someone can feel just as strongly about their belief as you do about yours, yet you think they are wrong.

Also i would like to point out that since the beginning of the early church they were had gnostics - and such others - who were claiming Jesus and interpreting teachings in their own way.

Again supporting my position - if it was an objective truth, everyone's way would be the same.

If anyone comes to your meeting and does not teach the truth about Christ, don’t invite that person into your home or give any kind of encouragement.
2 john 1;10

In other words, only talk to people who agree with you. That way you all support each other and convince yourselves ever more that you are right and everyone else is wrong. Hardly a good way to find truth. To find truth, you must put your ideas to the test and see if they can withstand that test. Not something you can do if you eliminate any opposing viewpoints.

For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.
Timothy 4:3

Yeah, people will just start believing what they want to and they'll find ways to justify their beliefs and claim that it's the truth. Sounds like what's happening today.

Now what do you think about the below scripture?

14 So then, dear friends, since you are looking forward to this, make every effort to be found spotless, blameless and at peace with him.

15 Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him.

16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.

17 Therefore, dear friends, since you have been forewarned, be on your guard so that you may not be carried away by the error of the lawless and fall from your secure position.

18But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and forever! Amen.

Fictitious.

We are talking about interpretation of scripture and variated results. We are not talking about the speed of light.

You missed the point. If there is an objective truth, a reliable test will show that everyone gets the same result. Since religion does not always give the same result, there is no reliable test.

Consistant - unchanging in nature, standard, or effect over time.

Or

compatible or in agreement with something.

Or

acting or done in the same way over time, especially so as to be fair or accurate.

What answer do you believe are inconsistent?

The many different versions of Christianity are the inconsistency. I've been very clear about this.

Why is it more unlikely?

What is your arguement here?

That it is more likely that the fault lies in the fact that the Bible is fictitious than the Bible is real and we just don't know how to interpret it.

For God so loved the world
That He gave His only Son
And whosoever believes will not perish
They shall have eternal life

Without Christ im just ian. What more is there to Christianity?

Unsupported claims are not evidence.

So what more is there to Christianity than the importance of salvation through Jesus?

What's all that other non-Jesus stuff doing in the Bible then?

Wow thank you for that video. We have chemical decomposition produced by passing an electric current through water which containis ions. In this case a solution of epsom salt, a battery and some test tubes.

The conclusion being that the ratio is 2:1 based on what amount of gas seen in each test tube. So in order to perform this test i have to follow instructions and use ingredients intregal to this test.

I would use salt or another impurity to conduct electricity as pure water cannot conduct.

I cannot use sugar dissolved in water, the solution does not conduct electricity because there are no ions in the solution. Salt, or sodium chloride (NaCl) breaks up into positive Na ions and negative Cl ions.

For us to get the proof we need to follow the instructions and we need to know what outcome we are looking for. There is no use performing this experiment without a desired conclusion. For example i would not perform this test to prove that gas is flammable.

Lets take this example of proof re physical science and apply it to proof re God.

Do you agree that in order for me to prove a result i must follow the directions prescribed by the authority and know how to identify the result or what result is desirable?

Of course, when the best technique the "experts" in religion can offer is, "You just have to have faith," and "You need to trust us on this," it's not exactly looking promising, is it?

Also do I go to the experiment to get proof ie i have to get all the ingredients and perform it myself?

Sure, you can do it if you want to.

Yes you have said such things, so how did this dragon give you joy? In what way or manner; by what means can the dragon give you joy?

How should I know? Are you an expert on the mechanisms by which your beliefs bring you joy?

I will. You said this dragon has power over nature or human fortunes and blesses - a blessing is God's or a gods favour and protection.

This dragon is a god to you.

Kylie - "Never really been religious, and considered myself atheist since I first knew what the word was"

So why have i got the above quote from you which says you consider yourself a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods. Which one is it there is a dragon god or no dragon god?

You are the one who decided that the Dragon should be called a God, not me. Don't demand that I explain the conclusions you jump to.

Kylie - "Regardless if you believe it or not, truth from the Great Bird of the Galaxy does not need human approval."

Which one is it an invisible dragon that lives in your backyard, a great bird of the galaxy or is it both?

Birds are descended from dinosaurs - indeed, it can be argued quite easily that birds are dinosaurs. If this Dragon is also a type of dinosaur that has evolved into what it is today, then it's quite possible that the Dragon and the Great Bird are the same thing.

And you are also not religious and consider yourself atheist. There is also the subject of the Great bird.

At this point i do not believe i can trust what you say is the truth when I consider such contradictions in what you say. Why should i trust you when i consider such things?

Hahahahahahaha, because religion never involves any contradictions, does it?

Why did he instigate it?

No idea. Why don't you invite him into your heart and perhaps he will tell you himself.

Good question the dragon is invisible and can only communicate telepathically, how do you know it was not the great bird?

If you've let Jesus into your heart, how do you know it's not really Satan pretending to be Jesus?

You see this is were it gets interesting. The only information we have on dragons are from the european and asian traditions. Your dragon conflicts with what is known about dragons from these 2 sources.

Why should i not trust them over you? How do you account for this discrepancy when we consider i only have 1 source for your dragon and many more for theirs?

Those two sources contradict each other, how could either of them possibly be true? And yet you are talking to someone who has direct experience with an actual dragon, and you ignore her? How does that make any sense?

Kylie · May 17, 2019

the iconoclast said:
If it hasnt then why do you preach this dragon to a committed Christian?

Because it's a Dragon and dragons are cool!

Then why do you want me to believe if thats another person that will pester it?

I'm showing you the door and saying you can knock. I'm not forcing you to knock, and I'm not saying the Dragon will open the door.

Your dragon is what allows life and the universe itself to exist. Your dragon god therefore is a thing that brings something into existence (.eg a creator). We have another conflict where does the great bird fit in?

Not sure. As I've already said, it's possible that the Dragon and the Great Bird are the same thing.

I agree, there is no comparison between your invisible dragon deity and quoting Biblical scriptures about God.

Ouch. Did you just shoot yourself in the foot? I think this response really hurts your position!!!!

You assume that randomly quoting Bible verses elevates your position above mine.

You are also the first person ive known to mention the great bird as well. Why is it that these 2 extraordinary individuals have only seeked you out?

Actually, the Great Bird of the Galaxy has been around for decades. Try googling it, don't just take my word for it.

My dear so far you have not convinced me and im starting to suspect you have made it up?

So? I'm not convinced by Christianity and I think that was made up too.

This reply is misrepresentation.

I will repeat the questions

With an expectation like yours, are you sure you would know how to hear from God or even know how to identify Him?

Have you considered that you may have formed the wrong opinion of God and used incorrect methods?

No, it is not misrepresentation. Believers in God have many differing beliefs. If the source of their beliefs is the same - the Bible - then the differing beliefs can only have happened because the source can be interpretted in different ways that lead to these differing beliefs.

Does your husband acknowledge these blessings?

He's seen that I have a happy life with him, and that I have pretty good health.

Exactly. You would have to ascertain what you did see before you came to a conclusion.

I'd say that we have to test our ideas before we can accept them as truth.

What is an example of a thing with evidence that supports several different possibilities whoch should led us to believe in the possibility that most closely fits the evidence without assuming things that the evidence doesn't support?

I think you misunderstand me.

If we see a thing, we can come up with ideas to explain it. We might have Explanation A, Explanation B and Explanation C. Now, we might find that Explanation A and Explanation B only work if there are things that we haven't seen, things that we don't have any evidence of. But Explanation C doesn't really have to assume anything that we don't know about. Thus, Explanation C is better.

For example, when people were trying to figure out how the planets moved, they started out thinking that the Earth was at the center of everything and that the sun and planets moved around the earth in perfect circles. But this didn't quite fit what was seen in the real world. So they had to invent the idea of things called epicycles; that is, they assumed that the planets didn't travel in a perfect circle, but they moved in little tiny circles, and the centers of these little tiny circles were what moved in a perfect circle around the Earth. But even that didn't explain it, and their efforts to make it work eventually had epicycles on epicycles on epicycles. But once they switched to the sun being at the center of the solar system and the planets moving in ellipses instead of circles, then everything fell into place and was nicely explained.

My dear you have not addressed the question.

I'm asking you to justify the position you base the question on.

Everything that is discovered has a name, could you please provide me with an example of something which has no purpose or no use?

Sure, provided that you tell me some method by which I can determine if something has no purpose or use.

I guess you are right. It is easy to see that you have made up this dragon and do not believe it exists yourself.

I love this. All these people out there grooving about how God and Jesus has given them blessings and made their life wonderful and so many people thinking that's indisputable proof that God and Jesus exist, and yet when I make the same claims about the Dragon, it's not enough for you? Geez, can we say double standards?

If you do not believe the thing you are preaching to me exists then why should i believe it exists?

If you want to believe that I'm making it up so you have an excuse to not believe, that's fine. But you haven't been able to point out any holes in my pro-Dragon argument.

Kylie · May 17, 2019

the iconoclast said:
Also Jesus sounds way cooler the an invisible dragon who can only communicate to one person and lives in a backyard. Doesnt sound very majestic. What u think?

What makes you think that the Dragon only communicates with me?

No, it just means im too old and lazy to go walking around your backyard and it assumes what my reaction would be. You assume it was the one that you predicted when it may not be the case.

Then why are you not open to the possibility that you would get the proof you need if you did walk around my backyard?

Im certain - 100% - and have got the evidence i needed. Im willing to die for Jesus, r u that certain you would die for this dragon?

Why in the world would Jesus ever need you to die for him? What can he possibly get from your death that he can't get some other way?

But you are that certain that there is a dragon that you would be willing give your life to the dragon, your industry, your talents and be willing go to prison for your belief.

The dragon gives me blessings in my life, why would those things ever happen to me?

I need a commitment from you.

I want you to start preaching this dragon deity to all on cf forums and reject any old atheist positions you have.

I want you to change your title to 'i reject atheism and proclaim the dragon deity'.

I want you to preach this dragon to @DogmaHunter and @Subduction Zone to show me how much you believe it.

I want you to tell me that you reject atheism and worship a dragon deity. I want to see this reflect in your postings in future.

Will you agree to these terms to show your commitment and trust in your experiences with the invisible dragon deity?

Don't tell me how to have my faith. If I started telling you what you needed to do to be a Christian, I'd get reported and banned. So don't you do it to me.

Then why do you want me to believe in it?

Because it's cool.

Well now we are left with the last possibility, What does that say about x if he is alive?

Like I said, it depends on whether we know what's really in his mind. And unless you're telepathic, there's no way to know for sure.

Im not that surprised, well a little maybe. Im learning lots about this dragon who lives in your backyard. Not convinced to accept him into my heart.

If i have to seek your dragon, should you seek God?

Are you forgetting? I've already sought God. Got nothing.

the iconoclast · May 20, 2019

Speedwell said:
if He ever even existed

Hey hey brother.

Is everything ok? Whats going on?

2PhiloVoid · May 20, 2019

the iconoclast said:
Hey hey to you beautiful ppl and heads up my dears ;p

This is an invite only thread.
Whos Invited?

@Kylie - rock on!!!

- Edit -

@Subduction Zone - the intellectual one!

@AV1611VET - the incomparable!

@2PhiloVoid - verycool!!!

@Shemjaza - a new acquaintance by seems cool!

I realised that kylie and i needed a home base for our periodical showdown. To all that may read this - im looking at you @Subduction Zone - i promised kylie a remarkable post that would impress her.

I am embarrassed.

The post that i have is quite unremarkable, includes tags/discussions about users who has since complained about me doing so - all i can say is, God just is - and more or less my post to kylie is me continuing to probe & ask questions.

I concentrated on a remarkable post to tmoney which @Herman Hedning requested and lost motivation for long replies. How do we solve this? Our own thread, lets combine it all and go one at a time.

Anyways i checked out our discussions. Main topics.
- catalysts
- pet dragons
- evolution
- cold fusion
- faith in scientists
- arguements against Andrew Wilies' proof of Fermat's Last Theorem
- how we can properly know each other
- homosexuality and the gene pool.
- girafe necks and evolution
- eardrums canals

And anything else you want to talk about!

- mods please let me know where to move this

I realise i cannot offer you a remarkable post but how about a remarkable thread? Anyways im willing to accept failure and award you a point (clean slate)

1 point to kylie
0 points to icon

Rules.
Civility, no attacks on person, unlimited time to reply and fun!!!
- and why not, the occasional witty retort or sledge (as long as its in good taste)

What say you my favourite atheist, would you like to start round 6?

Cheers

I've been on vacation so I'm late to this party ...

2PhiloVoid · May 20, 2019

the iconoclast said:
What are these different results? I will need some examples that you are aware of but in the mean while lets try it out.

Hey @2PhiloVoid, what conclusion or result did you reach?

I'd like to say I read it, I believed it, and that settled it for me, but it wasn't quite like that ... :dontcare:

the iconoclast · May 21, 2019

2PhiloVoid said:
I'd like to say I read it, I believed it, and that settled it for me, but it wasn't quite like that ...

Hey hey and i hope you had fun on your trip. Thanks for your reply.

the iconoclast · May 30, 2019

Kylie said:
The dragon gives me blessings in my life, why would those things ever happen to me?

Hey hey kylie my fav

I appreciate you taking the time to reply and would like to address the points you have made. Before we can address these points, i think we should nip this dragon thing once and for all.

To believe one must be convinced.

I am not convinced that you have an invisible dragon in your backyard that blesses you.

The reasons im not convinced are

1. Your actions are not consistant. Your dragon is a deity yet you are still an atheist and for some reason, a proud one.

2. Your dragon is not consistent with other traditional sources and there is no mention on the net about such a dragon. You are the only source for this dragon.

3. Ive checked your history and you do not preach this dragon regularly or intermittently.

I put forward the charge that this dragon is made up by you.

You cannot put this dragon forward as fact or as a basis for argument. Lumping attributes of Christian faith to such a deity only undermines your arguement. Such an action shows it is made up.

I would expect your words and actions to be consistent with such a belief. Your behaviour and actions on cf contradict such a belief or experience.

I officially call this busted - unless you commit to the bit by rejecting atheism and showing your commitment to this invisible dragon.

If you dont show me your commitment by your next post i will claim 1 point and bring the total to icon - 1, kylie - 1

What you think?

Cheers and dont worry we will address your other points, im looking forward to that

the iconoclast · May 30, 2019

Subduction Zone said:
That is a difference without distinction. She may not believe in her dragon, but there are other religions where people have their own "dragons".

Hey hey you

Thanks for your reply. Well lucky for us we are talking about kylies invisible dragon deity - who does not conform to traditional sources and who lives in her backyard.

If she does not believe in this dragon, if she is the only source for said dragon and if she is a proud atheist, then she cannot posit such a thing.

Is my line reasoning rational?

Cheers

Ps pls forgive my poor grammer or spelling

Kylie · May 30, 2019

the iconoclast said:
I am not convinced that you have an invisible dragon in your backyard that blesses you.

The reasons im not convinced are

1. Your actions are not consistant. Your dragon is a deity yet you are still an atheist and for some reason, a proud one.

The Dragon has told me not to think of it as a God.

2. Your dragon is not consistent with other traditional sources and there is no mention on the net about such a dragon. You are the only source for this dragon.

So? Very often, when I point out that a lot of Christianity seems to be taken from other religious ideas, tell me that it's not the case, and the Christianity is unique. When I tell you about the Dragon, which is likewise unique and not simply copying any dragon ideas that have come before, all of a sudden this is a problem?

3. Ive checked your history and you do not preach this dragon regularly or intermittently.

So? Do I need to be talking about it constantly for it to be true? I've been bugged countless times by people going on about their faith, people knocking on my door, people in the street. Why would I want to be that annoying.

I put forward the charge that this dragon is made up by you.

And I put forward the charge that Christianity was made up by someone a long time ago, and it was built on by others, but it was never really real.

You cannot put this dragon forward as fact or as a basis for argument. Lumping attributes of Christian faith to such a deity only undermines your arguement. Such an action shows it is made up.

And yet Christianity has done the same thing many times.

I would expect your words and actions to be consistent with such a belief. Your behaviour and actions on cf contradict such a belief or experience.

And I would expect people who proclaim themselves to be Christians to live according to the words of Jesus, but have a look at how many Christians don't...

I officially call this busted - unless you commit to the bit by rejecting atheism and showing your commitment to this invisible dragon.

As I have clearly stated, this is not a religious thing. The Dragon has stated that it is not a God and does not want to be treated as such.

If you dont show me your commitment by your next post i will claim 1 point and bring the total to icon - 1, kylie - 1

What you think?

I think you are trying to make this Dragon into something it isn't. I'm just telling you that it exists and it can be a great thing in your life. You're the one telling me that I should be looking at the Dragon as a deity and then getting upset when I'm not doing things the way you think I should be doing them.

Cheers and dont worry we will address your other points, im looking forward to that

I've learned not to hold my breath when it comes to your claims...

Jimmy D · May 30, 2019

I like the sound of this Dragon, I'm surprised you haven't been inspired to write a book about it.

I wasn't convinced at first, but I was thinking about how many cultures include dragons in their mythology... coincidence? I think not.

What can the Dragon do for me?

Kylie · May 30, 2019

Jimmy D said:
I like the sound of this Dragon, I'm surprised you haven't been inspired to write a book about it.

I wasn't convinced at first, but I was thinking about how many cultures include dragons in their mythology... coincidence? I think not.

What can the Dragon do for me?

Hopefully, it can do for you what it has done for me and fill your life with blessings. Open your heart to the Dragon and I'm sure that within a short time you will feel the blessings in your life.

Subduction Zone · Jun 1, 2019

the iconoclast said:
Hey hey you

Thanks for your reply. Well lucky for us we are talking about kylies invisible dragon deity - who does not conform to traditional sources and who lives in her backyard.

If she does not believe in this dragon, if she is the only source for said dragon and if she is a proud atheist, then she cannot posit such a thing.

Is my line reasoning rational?

Cheers

Ps pls forgive my poor grammer or spelling

Why would "traditional sources" be any more reliable that @Kylie ? The traditional sources of the Bible are said by some Christians to be eyewitness stories, but that does not appear to be the case for any of them. You have Kylie right here and can ask her all the questions that you want about her dragon. That seems to be a huge plus for her claims.

the iconoclast · Jun 1, 2019

Kylie said:
As I have clearly stated, this is not a religious thing. The Dragon has stated that it is not a God and does not want to be treated as such.

Hey hey kylie

I read your previous post and thats when the plot thickened.

Check this out my dear

We are at a fork, either your dragon is a deity or it is not. If your dragon is a deity and you are an atheist then the case is closed. Finito!

Your dragon contradicts your belief system (.eg proud atheist). If it existed and it is a deity then you would cease to be an atheist. Therefore you made it up and cannot posit such a thing.

Kylie - "Never really been religious, and considered myself atheist since I first knew what the word was"... and still a proud atheist!"

If you dragon is not a deity than we have a category error. You have made an error in which things belonging to a particular category are presented as if they belong to a different category, or, alternatively, a property is ascribed to a thing that could not possibly have that property.

Either way, i still retain that 1 point. Lets go over some relevant facts of the discussion.

Icon - "So this dragon has power over nature or human fortunes, this dragon is a deity?"

Kylie - "If you want to use that term, go ahead.

Kylie - "The dragon is what allows life and the universe itself to exist."

Kylie - "The One True Dragon has no need for a human style name."

Icon - "You said this dragon has power over nature or human fortunes and blesses - a blessing is God's or a gods favour and protection."

This dragon is a god to you."

Kylie - "You are the one who decided that the Dragon should be called a God, not me. Don't demand that I explain the conclusions you jump to."

You allow me to use the terminology when i asked the question. You did not disagree and now you have decided to change tune.

Please consider the below statement.

C. Scott Littleton defines a deity as "a being with powers greater than those of ordinary humans, but who interacts with humans, positively or negatively, in ways that carry humans to new levels of consciousness,beyond the grounded preoccupations of ordinary life"

Your dragon fits the defintion of a deity.

Is your dragon a deity or not?

Cheers

the iconoclast · Jun 1, 2019

Subduction Zone said:
Why would "traditional sources" be any more reliable that @Kylie ?

So if kylie does not believe in this dragon, if kylie is the only source for said dragon and if she is a proud atheist, then she CAN posit such a thing? Need an answer here.

My line of reasoning here can not be based on or in accordance with reason or logic when we consider the quality of being trustworthy ie reliable.

I need your opinion here (.eg speculation).
Why should i trust kylie and not the traditional ones?

The word dragon entered the English languagein the early 13th century from Old Frenchdragon, which in turn comes from Latin: draconem (nominative draco) meaning "huge serpent, dragon", from Ancient Greek δράκων, drákōn (genitive δράκοντος, drákontos) "serpent, giant seafish"

Kylies dragon has only came to our attention 6months-12months ago. Her dragon is invisible and intangible. Should this effect my decision?

Subduction Zone said:
The traditional sources of the Bible are said by some Christians to be eyewitness stories, but that does not appear to be the case for any of them.

My dear you are distracted.

We are talking about Kylies dragon which is -
Invisible
Intangible
The reason for life itself & the universe lives in her backyard
Can only communicate with her
Rewards faith with blessings,
Does not conform to traditional sources, Has a temper
Has only been documented by one person - who incidentally rejects deities and believes you cannot experience one.

What do you think about kylies dragon when you consider these attributes?

How do you detect an undetectable dragon?

Subduction Zone said:
You have Kylie right here and can ask her all the questions that you want about her dragon.

My dear check out the last 3 pages. You are not up to speed, i suggest you read the entire post.

Ill point something major out to you.

Icon - "So this dragon has power over nature or human fortunes, this dragon is a deity?"

Kylie - "If you want to use that term, go ahead."

Subduction Zone said:
That seems to be a huge plus for her claims.

What is this 'huge plus' to her claims?

Cheers

the iconoclast · Jun 1, 2019

Hey hey jimmie

You are officially invited! Dude i would love your opinion on the matter.

Im completely convinced kylie has made this dragon up, "a woman who has experienced the Dragon first hand right now" yet "Never really been religious, and considered myself atheist since I first knew what the word was"... and still a proud atheist!

Her dragon deity does not even meet her own requirements for objective evidence.

Here is a vital bit of info re her dragon

Icon - "So this dragon has power over nature or human fortunes, this dragon is a deity?"

Kylie - "If you want to use that term, go ahead."

Jimmy D said:
I like the sound of this Dragon, I'm surprised you haven't been inspired to write a book about it.

Now that is a very good point. Why has @Kylie not written a book about this!

Something this amazing could not have been undocumented until recently. What u think?

Jimmy D said:
I wasn't convinced at first, but I was thinking about how many cultures include dragons in their mythology... coincidence? I think not.

Well... r u convinced?

Ps we are not talking about dragons in the traditional sense or traditional sources. Kylies dragon has specifics and is unique, it does not conform.

Jimmy D said:
What can the Dragon do for me?

Lets recap what this dragon is.

Kylies dragon is invisible, intangible, the reason for life itself & the universe, lives in her backyard, can only communicate with her, rewards faith with blessings, does not conform to traditional sources, has a temper and has only been documented by one person - who incidentally rejects deities and believes you cannot experience one.

Kylie - "as well as the blessing of my daughter and my husband. I've got a job that is able to let me live fairly comfortably, as well as a side job that allows me to do something I love. I've also been blessed with pretty good health too."

Kylie - "The dragon gives me blessings in my life, why would those things ever happen to me"

This dragon has power over nature or human fortunes and still not consistant with traditional sources.

C. Scott Littleton defines a deity as "a being with powers greater than those of ordinary humans, but who interacts with humans, positively or negatively, in ways that carry humans to new levels of consciousness,beyond the grounded preoccupations of ordinary life"

Kylie - "I've received great joy"
Her dragon is beatific.

Kylies title is still proud atheist, that alone shows me her conclusion.

If she does not believe in this dragon, if she is the only source for said dragon and if she is a proud atheist, then she cannot posit such a thing.

She has made it up.

Is my line reasoning rational ie she cannot posit an entity which she obviously made up?

Cheers

Ps
Do you think its wierd that an atheist would believe such a thing?

Kylie · Jun 1, 2019

the iconoclast said:
Hey hey kylie

I read your previous post and thats when the plot thickened.

Check this out my dear

We are at a fork, either your dragon is a deity or it is not. If your dragon is a deity and you are an atheist then the case is closed. Finito!

Your dragon contradicts your belief system (.eg proud atheist). If it existed and it is a deity then you would cease to be an atheist. Therefore you made it up and cannot posit such a thing.

Kylie - "Never really been religious, and considered myself atheist since I first knew what the word was"... and still a proud atheist!"

If you dragon is not a deity than we have a category error. You have made an error in which things belonging to a particular category are presented as if they belong to a different category, or, alternatively, a property is ascribed to a thing that could not possibly have that property.

Either way, i still retain that 1 point. Lets go over some relevant facts of the discussion.

Icon - "So this dragon has power over nature or human fortunes, this dragon is a deity?"

Kylie - "If you want to use that term, go ahead.

Kylie - "The dragon is what allows life and the universe itself to exist."

Kylie - "The One True Dragon has no need for a human style name."

Icon - "You said this dragon has power over nature or human fortunes and blesses - a blessing is God's or a gods favour and protection."

This dragon is a god to you."

Kylie - "You are the one who decided that the Dragon should be called a God, not me. Don't demand that I explain the conclusions you jump to."

You allow me to use the terminology when i asked the question. You did not disagree and now you have decided to change tune.

Please consider the below statement.

C. Scott Littleton defines a deity as "a being with powers greater than those of ordinary humans, but who interacts with humans, positively or negatively, in ways that carry humans to new levels of consciousness,beyond the grounded preoccupations of ordinary life"

Your dragon fits the defintion of a deity.

Is your dragon a deity or not?

Cheers

If you want to call the Dragon a deity, feel free. The Dragon has let me know that he does not wish to be called a deity, and thus I do not call him one. Although he has also told me that if a person really wants to think of him as a deity, then he will allow it. He wants people to do whatever makes them happy (but not if those things will involve other people against their will). Thus I said that you can call him a deity if you want to, even though I personally wouldn't. The Dragon has seen what happens when belief systems have rigid laws, people end up getting hurt.

Ophiolite · Jun 1, 2019

Kylie said:
If you want to call the Dragon a deity, feel free. The Dragon has let me know that he does not wish to be called a deity, and thus I do not call him one. Although he has also told me that if a person really wants to think of him as a deity, then he will allow it. He wants people to do whatever makes them happy (but not if those things will involve other people against their will). Thus I said that you can call him a deity if you want to, even though I personally wouldn't. The Dragon has seen what happens when belief systems have rigid laws, people end up getting hurt.

I've not been invited to this party, but I just had to ask: this dragon, since he's a dragon, does he approve of flaming?

The defeated, the undefeated and the proud (invite only)

Defeater of Illogic

Regular Member

Defeater of Illogic

Defeater of Illogic

Defeater of Illogic

Atheism is weak. Yep, I said it

Get my point, Web-Maker ???

Get my point, Web-Maker ???

Atheism is weak. Yep, I said it

Atheism is weak. Yep, I said it

Atheism is weak. Yep, I said it

Defeater of Illogic

Well-Known Member

Defeater of Illogic

Regular Member

Atheism is weak. Yep, I said it

Atheism is weak. Yep, I said it

Atheism is weak. Yep, I said it

Defeater of Illogic

Recalcitrant Procrastinating Ape

Similar threads