Flying Spaghetti Monster

[Ana the Ist]

Then by the same token your false God hasn't validated your assertion that the faith of religious people is imaginary.

I don't know why anyone would be concerned at all with determining whether the faith of the religious is imaginary or not when the thing they have faith in is.

 

[Ana the Ist]

The reverse is true in the promotion of Atheism, you can't prove how your accusations aren't just imaginary make unbelief.

Well...if you read an accusation and reply to it, you're going to have a hard time proving its imaginary lol.

 

[variant]

The reverse is true in the promotion of Atheism, you can't prove how your accusations aren't just imaginary make unbelief.

This is quite possibly one of the dumbest things I've ever read.

 

[Colter]

Well...if you read an accusation and reply to it, you're going to have a hard time proving its imaginary lol.

Atheist claim to know that the object of faith isn't real, when pressed they can't produce evidence of how they know just like believes cannot provide irrefutable proofs of the object of their faith.

 

[variant]

Atheist claim to know that the object of faith isn't real, when pressed they can't produce evidence of how they know just like believes cannot provide irrefutable proofs of the object of their faith.

Given that I am agnostic...

 

[Colter]

Given that I am agnostic...

Oh, agnostic, figures....

 

[variant]

Oh, agnostic, figures....

Agnostic just means that I don't think we can evaluate the truth of religious claims as they are often poorly defined and unfalcefiable.

But I don't claim to "know" there isn't a God I just don't believe in it.

Further, we put the burden of proof on people making positive claims, not on everyone else to disprove them.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Atheist claim to know that the object of faith isn't real, when pressed they can't produce evidence of how they know just like believes cannot provide irrefutable proofs of the object of their faith.

I don't actually know any atheists who claim to know what you're claiming they do.

 

[keith99]

I don't actually know any atheists who claim to know what you're claiming they do.

Nor have I.

But some Christians enjoy knocking down the straw man of their own creation.

 

[Colter]

I don't actually know any atheists who claim to know what you're claiming they do.

Its common that atheists on these threads believe that religious people are just imagining things. If they claim to know that I would ask how.

 

[quatona]

Faith is the proof of religion,

Ah, so whatever someone has faith in must therefore exist?

So we need a new reductio ad absurdum, to demonstrate that you don´t believe in the very standards you are proposing here:
Do Thetans exist? Countless scientologists believe in them.

do you have faith in the Spaghetti God?

No, of course not. But if I would, would the FSM suddenly pop into existence?

If so what is the gospel of your God?

Are you saying that if I declared the FSM a God it would become real?
The FSM is not a God, I have no affiliation with it, I don´t believe it exists. All this has been explained numerous times to you: The FSM is brought up as a reductio ad absurdum (a perfectly valid epistemological tool).
The FSM is supernatural, and that´s the very point: Declaring something supernatural renders all known methods of discerning its truth value obsolete.
If you can´t even provide a method by which it can be shown that the most ridiculous product of our fantasy and the allegedly most important entity fathomable have different "truth values" (if only they are called "supernatural") we have a serious, unsurmountable problem with the epistemology of the "supernatural". This is obviously the case, or else you wouldn´t have to resort to various logical fallacies in this discussion.

 

[variant]

Its common that atheists on these threads believe that religious people are just imagining things. If they claim to know that I would ask how.

I specifically said religious people have trouble differentiating their ideas from make believe, not that I specifically can know your ideas to be imaginary.

 

[Colter]

Ah, so whatever someone has faith in must therefore exist?

So we need a new reductio ad absurdum, to demonstrate that you don´t believe in the very standards you are proposing here:
Do Thetans exist? Countless scientologists believe in them.

No, of course not. But if I would, would the FSM suddenly pop into existence?

Are you saying that if I declared the FSM a God it would become real?
The FSM is not a God, I have no affiliation with it, I don´t believe it exists. All this has been explained numerous times to you: The FSM is brought up as a reductio ad absurdum (a perfectly valid epistemological tool).
The FSM is supernatural, and that´s the very point: Declaring something supernatural renders all known methods of discerning its truth value obsolete.
If you can´t even provide a method by which it can be shown that the most ridiculous product of our fantasy and the allegedly most important entity fathomable have different "truth values" (if only they are called "supernatural") we have a serious, unsurmountable problem with the epistemology of the "supernatural". This is obviously the case, or else you wouldn´t have to resort to various logical fallacies in this discussion.

That people have faith is proof of the existence of generic religion in the heart of the believer regardless of the quality or consistency of a given theology. An honest religionists would concede that the vast gulf between the mortals conceptual capacity and the absolutes of the I AM leads to gross distortion of understanding of God. Living faith bridges the gap (not to be confused with wishful thinking) rather the faith gift is itself a spiritual entity.

I assume that you have moral values, if I were a nihilist pressing you for proof of the existence of morals, values or love, then you would find yourself in the same position as the religionists who has faith, a conscious contact with what we call God. The nihilist would also present a bunch of intellectual mumbo jumbo Latin crapundum that sounds cute but demonstrates nothing. You know the existence of your values, but they are super-material and not adequately provable in the science lab.

 

[True Scotsman]

Atheist claim to know that the object of faith isn't real, when pressed they can't produce evidence of how they know just like believes cannot provide irrefutable proofs of the object of their faith.

I have done just that. I presented to you an irrefutable argument and you dismissed it without even attempting to refute it. It still stands. It has never been refuted unlike every single argument for god over the last 2,000 years. Would you like me to repeat it here for you so you can attempt to refute it?

I also proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that you would have to accept its main premise even to disagree with it. Would you like me to repeat that as well since you never responded to that either.

 

[True Scotsman]

Its common that atheists on these threads believe that religious people are just imagining things. If they claim to know that I would ask how.

Two ways:

1. I've never found a theist who can tell me a reliable way to distinguish between what they call "God" and something that they are merely imagining. You admitted to me when I pressed you on this question that you couldn't do it.

2. The concept of "God" violates the primacy of existence principle.

 

[True Scotsman]

That people have faith is proof of the existence of generic religion in the heart of the believer regardless of the quality or consistency of a given theology. An honest religionists would concede that the vast gulf between the mortals conceptual capacity and the absolutes of the I AM leads to gross distortion of understanding of God. Living faith bridges the gap (not to be confused with wishful thinking) rather the faith gift is itself a spiritual entity.

I assume that you have moral values, if I were a nihilist pressing you for proof of the existence of morals, values or love, then you would find yourself in the same position as the religionists who has faith, a conscious contact with what we call God. The nihilist would also present a bunch of intellectual mumbo jumbo Latin crapundum that sounds cute but demonstrates nothing. You know the existence of your values, but they are super-material and not adequately provable in the science lab.

That people have faith is proof that people pretend to know things they don't know and that's all it's proof of. Reason is not automatic and many people abandon it when it won't allow them to blur the lines between reality and fantasy. Colter, values are not some supernatural entity. They are always something in the real world in relation to a consciousness. They are objective. I can imagine a pet creature which I could feed my household garbage to and which would then leave droppings of solid gold nuggets. This creature would be an enormous value to me.....if it existed. Before something can be valued it must exist.

 

[Colter]

I have done just that. I presented to you an irrefutable argument and you dismissed it without even attempting to refute it. It still stands. It has never been refuted unlike every single argument for god over the last 2,000 years. Would you like me to repeat it here for you so you can attempt to refute it?

I also proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that you would have to accept its main premise even to disagree with it. Would you like me to repeat that as well since you never responded to that either.

You didn't prove anything other than you live inside of a sad, closed minded theory that you use as a filter for anything to the contrary.

But my people come from Scotland, I figure they came to the new world in search of more booze. So we at least have that in common.

 

[Colter]

That people have faith is proof that people pretend to know things they don't know and that's all it's proof of. Reason is not automatic and many people abandon it when it won't allow them to blur the lines between reality and fantasy. Colter, values are not some supernatural entity. They are always something in the real world in relation to a consciousness. They are objective. I can imagine a pet creature which I could feed my household garbage to and which would then leave droppings of solid gold nuggets. This creature would be an enormous value to me.....if it existed. Before something can be valued it must exist.

Ha ha ha, now who has the bald assertions. Message for Scotsman, your philosophy of life is morbid, it has no appeal to real truth seekers.

 

[Colter]

Two ways:

1. I've never found a theist who can tell me a reliable way to distinguish between what they call "God" and something that they are merely imagining. You admitted to me when I pressed you on this question that you couldn't do it.

2. The concept of "God" violates the primacy of existence principle.

The I AM is primacy, the Trinity liberates the Father from its inherent limitations.

Your demand for proofs of the consciousness of spirit perception is a cowards bluff.

 

[Davian]

The FSM is clearly in the lead at this point.

May you all be touched by his noodly appendage.