- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,855,655
- 52,517
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Painful to whom?
You're the one who is hesitant to post it.
Does CF have higher standards than Buddha?
Upvote
0
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.
Painful to whom?the truth hurts huh? Sometimes it can be the most painful of all.
I'm just curious why a Buddhist would be saying something like this:You know quite well what rational people might want to say could be sanctionable at CF. Indeed, your post could be seen as goading!
Aren't Buddhists supposed to be following a Noble Eightfold Path that teaches:If this forum wasn't so sensitive i would tell you exactly who we are dealing with.
I'm just curious why a Buddhist would be saying something like this:Aren't Buddhists supposed to be following a Noble Eightfold Path that teaches:
That's assumed in the premise.
No, I'm not going to assume my challenge failed because you are refusing to play along.Assumed by Whom? Certainly not by me so I have no reason to Try to convince anyone something that I do not believe myself. Assumed by yourself purhaps which means that only you believe that you created the Apple and thus we come full circle to the point that YOU believed you created the apple and must convince me that you did.
Your "Challange" Failed before you even posted it. Get a New Hat cause this one's Old and Tired.
No, I'm not going to assume my challenge failed because you are refusing to play along.
If you're unwilling to assume the premise of the OP, then all you're doing is demonstrating the lack of understanding that can occur by not co-operating; then expecting me to take the blame for it.
No, I'm not going to assume my challenge failed because you are refusing to play along.
If you're unwilling to assume the premise of the OP, then all you're doing is demonstrating the lack of understanding that can occur by not co-operating; then expecting me to take the blame for it.
Well, then, either agree with me or show me to be in error.You assume that creation ex nihilo leaves no evidence, then ask us if there is evidence.
Well, then, either agree with me or show me to be in error.
I don't care which, but if my challenge has you speechless ... please demonstrate.
I´m sorry, but I have to disagree.Fine. Assuming I actually saw the apple being created ex nihilo, I would not be able to use any evidence for anyone else, on account of the lack of evidence. The only way I could prove it would be to show there is no other way of the apple coming into existence, which is impossible. Therefore I would not be able to prove it to anyone else.
There's the answer to your challenge - it can't be done.
Of course, this is a hypothetical situation that cannot be applied to the real world as the real world has laws of physics, but even in this magical world you still wouldn't be able to prove it. I'm just saying this in case you were going to try and apply this thinking to God or Creation or something, but nobody would try to do something that stupid.
I´m sorry, but I have to disagree.
Creation ex nihilo is not in any way an observable mechanism. Hypothetically stating that is does this and doesn´t do that does not change that. Hypothetical assumptions cannot replace observations as a means of reasoning.
<snip>
Ah, but hypothetical situations can used as a means of reasoning, provided you keep your reasoning within the hypothetical situation. Hence why I said that my answer cannot be extrapolated to apply to anything other than this single hypothetical situation. The hypothetical assumption can be considered to be an observation of this hypothetical world, but that is all.
I think I know what you're saying, and I agree, hence my last paragraph.
Well, then, either agree with me or show me to be in error.
I don't care which, but if my challenge has you speechless ... please demonstrate.
I just showed how you were in error. What do you prove by claiming you made an apple appear in your hand, leaving no evidence, and then ask us if there is any evidence you did so? You even claim what the apple looks like is irrelevant! What conclusions can anyone made from this "challenge" of yours? Is it applicable to all events of creation ex nihilo? Of course not!... It is entirely made up!Well, then, either agree with me or show me to be in error.
I don't care which, but if my challenge has you speechless ... please demonstrate.
No, you haven't shown me to be in error.I just showed how you were in error.
As it should be.trying to make any positive claim from an unfalsifiable position is also an error.
As it should be.
Trying to plug miracles into your myopic electronic prophets will just make them go 404.
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?