Setting the Record Straight

[AV1611VET]

Your boolean standards are flawed.

You're entitled to your opinion.

But I was asked why I argue against reality, and I submitted my 'flawed' Boolean standards as the reason I do so.

Are you saying you still don't understand why I argue against reality?

If so, how can I change my answer to suit both of our tastes simultaneously?

 

[Skreeper]

You're entitled to your opinion.

But I was asked why I argue against reality, and I submitted my 'flawed' Boolean standards as the reason I do so.

Are you saying you still don't understand why I argue against reality?

If so, how can I change my answer to suit both of our tastes simultaneously?

I just wanted to make sure you understand that your reasoning is flawed.
I understand why you argue against reality but I was hoping that you at least try to be rational.

And it is not my "opinion" that your methodology is flawed. It is a fact that your axiom is unjustified and can't be used as a boolean, unless of course you like being irrational.

 

[AV1611VET]

I just wanted to make sure you understand that your reasoning is flawed.

I understand why you think it's flawed.

You're an atheist: so of course you would.

I understand why you argue against reality but I was hoping that you at least try to be rational.

I might be irrational in your opinion, but at least I know why I argue against reality.

 

[VirOptimus]

As long as you understand why I keep arguing against physical reality, my 'crap' has answered your question.

I really dont understand, I see your arguments but they are quite underwhelming.

But far from me to hinder you tilting at windmills.

 

[Skreeper]

I understand why you think it's flawed.

You're an atheist: so of course you would.

This has nothing to do with me being an Atheist. Using the bible as an axiom is unjustified.
This might be a shock for you, but not every Christian views the Bible as the inerrant holy book you make it out to be.

 

[AV1611VET]

I really dont understand,

You don't understand what? my standards?

You don't have to understand them, just accept that I submitted them as an answer to your question.

Hopefully you've learned something and won't ask it again.

But if you do, I'll take the liberty to give you the exact same answer as I always have.

... I see your arguments but they are quite underwhelming.

If you are 'underwhelmed' by my answers, then I have to suspect the problem lies on your side ... not mine.

Educatee: Why do you cut down trees?
Lumberjack: Because I'm a lumberjack.
Educatee: Lumberjack standards are flawed.
Lumberjack: You're entitled to your opinion; but do you understand why I cut down trees now?

 

[AV1611VET]

This has nothing to do with me being an Atheist. Using the bible as an axiom is unjustified.
This might be a shock for you, but not every Christian views the Bible as the inerrant holy book you make it out to be.

Is there something I can help you understand about why I argue against reality, Skreeper?

Or are we going to have this conversation again sometime in the future?

 

[Skreeper]

Is there something I can help you understand about why I argue against reality, Skreeper?

As I said, I understand why you do it but in doing so you're being irrational.

 

[AV1611VET]

As I said, I understand why you do it but in doing so you're being irrational.

If I want your opinion, I'll ask for it.

But, of course, in the meantime, you're entitled to butt-in (as I do at times) and give it while I'm educating someone on why I think like I do.

He still doesn't get it; and I have a feeling you're just exacerbating his lack of understanding with potshots from the sideline.

 

[miknik5]

This has nothing to do with me being an Atheist. Using the bible as an axiom is unjustified.
This might be a shock for you, but not every Christian views the Bible as the inerrant holy book you make it out to be.

I think he was just trying to give you the physical evidence to support his standards so that you could understand

Because, well because, you don't see GOD like you see the Bible

And we see GOD sir just as we see the Bible
And we know the Bible is GOD's WORD

Therefore, if you substituted Bible for GOD in these steps then maybe you would understand that there is no "flaw" at all in this logic since GOD is sovereign over all things

Even science

 

[Skreeper]

If I want your opinion, I'll ask for it.

It is not just an opinion that you're being irrational when you admit at arguing against reality.

Is it also just my opinion when I say that a person who believes we're living in the matrix is irrational?

I doubt it.

 

[Skreeper]

And we see GOD sir just as we see the Bible

Correction: You think you see god. Could you be mistaken though?

And we know the Bible is GOD's WORD

How do you know?

Therefore, if you substituted Bible for GOD in these steps then maybe you would understand that there is no "flaw" at all in this logic since GOD is sovereign over all things

You start with demonstrating that a god exists, then we can talk about why we should treat the Bible as something special.

 

[Kylie]

No i dont
However if I am eating with one who follows these rules and according to their traditions I know this is an offense to them I won't eat a ham sandwich

So you think I should not talk about religion with my husband because it offends you?

Yeah, good luck with that. When it comes to what I discuss with my husband, I don't give a damn about what offends you and what doesn't.

Do you really want me to say to him, "I can't talk about this, because it offends some random person I know on the net." Is that what you want?

 

[Kylie]

To a point; then God draws the line.

Yeah, okay. Whatever you say.

Maybe one day you can show me this alleged line.

 

[VirOptimus]

You don't understand what? my standards?

You don't have to understand them, just accept that I submitted them as an answer to your question.

Hopefully you've learned something and won't ask it again.

But if you do, I'll take the liberty to give you the exact same answer as I always have.If you are 'underwhelmed' by my answers, then I have to suspect the problem lies on your side ... not mine.

Educatee: Why do you cut down trees?
Lumberjack: Because I'm a lumberjack.
Educatee: Lumberjack standards are flawed.
Lumberjack: You're entitled to your opinion; but do you understand why I cut down trees now?

My points obviously went over your head.

Your analogy is misplaced btw.

 

[miknik5]

Correction: You think you see god. Could you be mistaken though?



How do you know?



You start with demonstrating that a god exists, then we can talk about why we should treat the Bible as something special.

No. I am not mistaken
Sorry

John 3:8 , 1 John 2:27 are TRUTH

 

[miknik5]

Yeah, okay. Whatever you say.

Maybe one day you can show me this alleged line.

Maybe one day your husband will?

Why not consider listening to his testimony?

 

[Skreeper]

No. I am not mistaken
Sorry

John 3:8 , 1 John 2:27 are TRUTH

Without any evidence I can't accept your claim.

Sorry.

 

[miknik5]

Without any evidence I can't accept your claim.

Sorry.

That's okay
The witnesses still testify

 

[Kylie]

Maybe one day your husband will?

Why not consider listening to his testimony?

Sure. I'll believe anything at all, no matter how outrageous.

All I ask is evidence to support the claims. That's not unreasonable, is it?