Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
sounds like a great discussion for another forum. why don't you post it? Think you could handle it? are you afraid every christian on cf would jump on you? bom bom buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuum.
thats ok, you don't have to wory about hurting my feelings. but seriously, why don't you post it?Well, actually it was more like I noticed you were a great fan of his writings and I didn´t want to hurt your feelings. But whatever mindreadings float your boat....
No retraction, just no need in trying to prove what you already know to be true.On the contrary, you have made a claim, and a bold one at that. I am simply asking for your justification. If you cannot present it, then I will take that as a retraction.
It is not required. If you enjoy torturing babies to hear them scream and do not realize it is wrong, you are too mentally defective for me to prove anything to you. You don't have the mental capability of understanding it. Being evil is not about considering yourself evil. Being evil is about doing things to harm others. It has nothing at all to do with how you consider yourself to be.On the contrary, I would very much like to hear the screams of babies. I do not consider it an evil act, nor do I consider myself evil.
Prove me wrong.
Not needed.Justification?
No not on everything, just on some things.Nonsense. Do you have the same moral view as me on everything? Bestiality? Pornography? Abortion? Homosexuality? The death penalty?
Yes our conscience can be wrong. We can have it traumitized by enviroment or we can go against it so long, it is changed.Instinct is not knowledge. A simple proof of this is that instinct can be wrong. If my instinct tells me that someone is hiding in my closet, does that mean that someone is hiding in my closet?
And the burdern as been fulfilled by pointing things that you agree with me on even as you deny it.I say again: the burden is on you to prove that some things are not right irrespective of subjectivity.
You assume I know it to be true. Why?No retraction, just no need in trying to prove what you already know to be true.
Ah, finally.It is not required. If you enjoy torturing babies to hear them scream and do not realize it is wrong, you are too mentally defective for me to prove anything to you. You don't have the mental capability of understanding it. Being evil is not about considering yourself evil. Being evil is about doing things to harm others. It has nothing at all to do with how you consider yourself to be.
Of course it is. You made a claim. Justify it. Despite your bleating, there are only three things that a human actually knows: the Laws of Logic (and everything derived thereof), their own existance, and the existance of incoming sensory input.Not needed.
No not on everything, just on some things.
Then how, pray tell, do they fulfil the burden of proof? A proof is unchanging and forever, it does not yield to the trauma of humans. If our instinct, or our mutual recognition, differ in any way, then your proof is invalidated. Your proofs are nothing more than 'Assume it is true. Therefore, it is true'.Yes our conscience can be wrong. We can have it traumitized by enviroment or we can go against it so long, it is changed.
That is your defence?And the burdern as been fulfilled by pointing things that you agree with me on even as you deny it.
Well, why would I?thats ok, you don't have to wory about hurting my feelings. but seriously, why don't you post it?
actually the LordLiar(devil of hell)Lunatic argument was ment to point out the faulty logic in people who say Jesus was a GOOD teacher but not God. i hear that ripped out of context so much that it's "so stupid that it hurts" no i don't think you've discussed this as many times as you imply.- The LordLiarLunatic argument alone is so stupid that it hurts
read it again. . . Q. why do people read things then rip everything the author says out of context just so their theories remain true in their own mind? did you know the only thing we agreed on was one of his arguments?He bascially has the same approach that you have: He comes up with things that may be effective to the already convinced and that give them a warm and fuzzy feeling, but which are by no means arguments in a discussion with non-believers. Ultimately, they are circular and begging the question.
by wiccan_child Until you can demonstrate that I know what you claim I know (i.e., that your personal morality is correct), you statements will be groundless.
(i.e., that your personal morality is correct), you statements will be groundless.
and that's just plain ridiculousUntil you can demonstrate that I know what you claim I know . . .
you actually said both of these quotes in the same paragraph. . . . ok. lets apply your logic to this statement. Until you can demonstrate that I know what you claim I know your statements will be groundless.Despite your bleating, there are only three things that a human actually knows: the Laws of Logic (and everything derived thereof), their own existance, and the existance of incoming sensory input.
It still silently excludes some other options.actually the LordLiar(devil of hell)Lunatic argument was ment to point out the faulty logic in people who say Jesus was a GOOD teacher but not God.
Me too, and guess who it is that usually use it for an apologetics argument? (That´s of course not Lewis´ fault, though).i hear that ripped out of context so much that it's "so stupid that it hurts" no i don't think you've discussed this as many times as you imply.
I don´t know. You have already insinuated a reason in your question. Are you asking for a reason for the reason you are suspecting?read it again. . . Q. why do people read things then rip everything the author says out of context just so their theories remain true in their own mind?
I don´t understand what you are talking about here.Who agreed on one of whose arguments?did you know the only thing we agreed on was one of his arguments?
Yes, it´s not funny if you are not familiar with Monty Python´s Flying Circus. So just in case I added a smilie.the inquisition thing was a bit of an overstatement on your part.
Thanks. I definitely need people to tell me what my mental state is.no one's trying to kill you. i know you're afraid, but it's ok. i'm not going to let them take you. stand behind me, i have an ax. . . .
Thanks, same here.but away from all that, thankyou for listening it was a pleasure having this discussion with you.
All humans have this knowledge.You assume I know it to be true. Why?
No I consider it a defintion of a term that can for a basis for discussion.Ah, finally.
Being evil is about doing things to harm others.
Do you consider this to be an objective truth, or one you assume?
Your denial is not convincing.Of course it is. You made a claim. Justify it. Despite your bleating, there are only three things that a human actually knows: the Laws of Logic (and everything derived thereof), their own existance, and the existance of incoming sensory input.
Until you can demonstrate that I know what you claim I know (i.e., that your personal morality is correct), you statements will be groundless.
The burden of proof is fulfill by you knowing your own conscience.Then how, pray tell, do they fulfil the burden of proof?
No differences do not erase the similarities.A proof is unchanging and forever, it does not yield to the trauma of humans. If our instinct, or our mutual recognition, differ in any way, then your proof is invalidated. Your proofs are nothing more than 'Assume it is true. Therefore, it is true'.
I never said you did know. You do know but you deny you know so advance your argument.That is your defence?
"You agree with me, you just don't know it".
Absurd.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?