tony1, Sir Loone, and anyone else that wants to chime in.

Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by Patman, Nov 5, 2001.

  1. Patman just one of the lost Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    123
    Big dilemma. I understand that a donation to the church that you attend is necessary for them to continue there service. But if you don't mind can you tell me why they ask for a percentage of your pay and give a chart listed by annual income to tell you how much you should give? If you can please remind me of how Jesus was a humble, non-materialistic servant of god. Please feel free to Quote pro's and con's from either perspective.

    Your help in this matter would be welcome.

    As a good friend of mine put it "faith does not = money, money does not = faith."

    What do you think about these people trying to buy their way into heaven?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Patman just one of the lost Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    123
    Lookiey Here!
    Sent from
    St Maria Goretti Church
    1300 Woodtick Road
    P.O Box 6291
    Wolcott, CT 06716.
    Nov 2, 2001

    Dear Mr. Patman,

    For the past several weeks we have been speaking about Stewardship and renewing our time and talent commitment to St. Maria Goretti Church. Now it is time to address the third component of Stewardship, which is treasure. For many Catholics this is the hardest of all to share, yet it can be rewarding when shared.

    On the the weekend of Nov.10th-11th, we will be privileged to hear from members of our parish community who will share their Stewardship Journey with us at the masses. I am grateful to them for agreeing to give witness to the importance of their Catholic faith.

    Stewardship is an opportunity to respond, in gratitude to God, a portion of the blessings He has freely given to us. Catholic families who embrace stewardship are working towards committing 5% of their income to their parish and 5% to worthy charities. It is important to recognize that everything we have- including life itself-is a gift from God.

    Our development as good and spiritually deep Catholics needs to take a concrete form. This concrete expression of faith was discussed in our letter on Time & Talent. But the spiritual and physical growth of our parish depends on tithe. If you want your parish to be what you want it to be, then such is possible only through your tithe.

    Remember, you make a living by what you earn and a life by what you share. Your willingness to return a portion of your gifts reflects your commitment to God and our Church and its mission. Please pray over the many blessings that God has provided you as you contemplate your 2002 Treasure commitment. Please indicate your new commitment by returning the intention card in the envelope provided on Treasure Commitment Weekend, November 10th- 11th.

    I only ask you do your best - it is all that can be expected- and what God deserves. Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to walk the with you. My prayers are with you every day.

    Sincerely yours in Christ,
    Reverend William R. Sokolowski
    Pastor


    Now after writing this I feel some what sick to my stomach. I hope for your help in this matter

    thanx again

    Patrick
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Godless Objectivist Mind Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,197
    The church is a business

    Weather theists like it or not, the church is a business, the servises that the church provides has to be payed for, i.e. The building of worship, deaths, marriages, first communium, "for catholics", they also provide a lot of moral support to the poor, in which money is needed to feed, clothes, shelter, to provide these services to the unfortunate.

    The advantages, it's a business which pays no tax, mainly cause they help support the poor, it is unfortunate that there are a few individuals who take advantage of these priviledges, and use it for their own gain, however we can't judge the whole lot on a few bad apples. "there just seems to be a lot of bad apples"

    When a televangelist demands for it's worshipers to give money, they collect 1000's of dollars.

    Look at Pat Robertson, he's worth is close to the billion mark. Oral Roberst collected millions, so has Shawgart, "hell I don't remember if it's spelled correctly", the Bakers were multi-millionaires, and many are.

    If you were to get the net worth of the Pope, it's in the billions, of course it's not his personal net worth, it's just the net worth of his empire of the catholic church.

    So next time you are sitting in church, remember that monies collected go to do a lot of good, as well as make the man running the church wealthy!.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. KalvinB Publicity Whore Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,063
    Gee Godless, your knowledge of religion is astounding. Didn't you just tell me not to stereotype UNbelievers? But it's okay for you to stereotype believers? I see.

    Nowhere in the Bible is the church run like a business. The tithe was for sacrifice, not for the gain of the leaders. False leaders turn SOME denominations into businesses. Those who follow the Bible are not. I personally refuse to go to a church that requires a tithe. If I want to give, I'll give. But not because it's asked of me.

    Ben
     
  8. Godless Objectivist Mind Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,197
    Well Kalvin I wasn't...

    Steroiping I was however reporting facts!!. wether believers treat religion as the ancient philosophy or not was not the case, however it's leaders sure as hell treat as a business! and the net worth of these individuals are factual!.

    And to be certain of it check this out;

    http://www.chick.com/reading/books/153/153_10.asp
     
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2001
  9. KalvinB Publicity Whore Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,063
    Not all of them. It does take money to operate a church. That doesn't make it a business though SOME leaders try to make it as such.

    Ben
     
  10. Thewriter Registered Member

    Messages:
    19
    It's all about the benjamins

     
  11. Godless Objectivist Mind Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,197
    Coool name "Thewriter"

    Funny you should mention my cite that I gave here, I found it by asking Google "list the richest church" many came up ofcourse, this one called my attention cause of the movie, "The Godfather III" which dealt with buying into the papal church of the catholics in Rome.

    And yes you'r correct all religions run their churches has a business, i'ts just not easy demonstrating this to Kalvin or Tony1, "which I might add" has'nt been around lately.

    My father always used to say to me " If you truly want to become rich, become a priest, you earn tax free mony!"
     
  12. KalvinB Publicity Whore Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,063
    I have yet to find a denomination that has it all right.

    This doesn't surprise me. Back in the day it was a weekly thing to debate on Saturday (since that was the Jews' Sabbath) and on Sunday the Christians had their own worship.

    No one (leadership wise) does that anymore. Everyone is so convinced they're right they have no idea they aren't.

    I would like to see the leaders for every religion get together once a week to discuss a doctrine. Not that it would resolve anything. It would at least be encouraging to see them try.

    In the mean time I'll figure out the truth myself.

    Ben
     
  13. Godless Objectivist Mind Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,197
    Wow!!

    This is by far the best post, I've ever read from you Kalvin. Specially when you "quote" "In the mean time I'll figure out the truth myself." This is pretty much what drives many men/women to become athiests.
     
  14. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,882
    Second

    KalvinB ...

    Well, since I just got done unloading in one of our other debates, it might be worth my while to second Godless on the kudos, and I'll leave out the part about atheists.

    No, I won't. But ... that's just the generalization. Look at me: I'm not an atheist yet. Anymore. Yet. Whatever.

    thanx,
    Tiassa

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  15. Cris In search of Immortality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,199
    Kalvinb,

    I suspect that finding a Christian sect that has the right answer is going to become increasingly difficult.

    When I came to the USA in 1996 I was given some immigration literature and among that was a list of Christian churches and sects in the SF Bay area. There were 130 listed entries. I assume all of them have their own biblical interpretations and rituals. As the American saying goes, we have something for everyone. It seems there is little interest in truth but in finding a ‘truth’ that is palatable, or in other words, feel free to believe what you wish. And of course if you can’t find a sect that suits your needs then why not create your own, in the true spirit of American free enterprise. With that attitude I suspect that the number of sects is growing, and that means that any original consistent message is being rapidly diffused and unrecognizable.

    But wasn’t Catholicism the original? So why wasn’t that suitable for everyone? Isn’t it true that some people didn’t like the catholic interpretation, and from there you have the inevitable breakup of the Christian church.

    When the British Empire was being built the military leaders of the time had a fundamental and successful strategy – divide and conquer. As an atheist I suspect I have little to fear from Christianity becoming a unified force again, all the signs are that the numerous disagreements resulting in hundreds of sects will ultimately end in total disarray and irrelevance.

    Even you, I suspect, with your search for the truth might well end up creating your own sect that supports your interpretation or religious requirements.

    Also consider that organizations like the International Atheist Alliance that didn’t exist a few years ago, and would have been illegal a few decades ago, are rapidly growing in size and membership. This force will also add to the confusion of potential Christians. And the TV evangelists and the like: The louder they shout and rant in the hope of gaining more conversions, increasingly look foolish and more like money-grabbing charlatans.

    Do you really expect to find a truth among that mess? None of this doesn’t mean that a God doesn’t exist or that Jesus himself might have actually existed etc, but how do you decide what his true message was. The bible does have numerous contradictions that lead many to follow different sects, so the bible alone is not going to help you find a truth. So I don’t see that you have any real hope.

    Remember also that Europe is becoming increasingly secular leaving the Americas as the primary Christian strongholds. Modern European cultures are rapidly maturing and gaining in scientific and technological capabilities, and in most cases they are more advanced than the USA. The US often appears to outsiders like myself as a quaint puritanical culture, at least on the surface, but with a powerful underground upwelling of free-thinkers. The state education system here is very poor on science with falling numbers of university applicants for science. Europe is the reverse and with an increase in real knowledge means that curious superstitions and religions are rapidly declining.

    Whether you call it atheism or free-thinking or skepticism or similar, it all means that these growing groups are looking for a truth based on real facts and not on hopes and wishes or faith that is really quite unsatisfactory.

    So I guess I am appealing to your strong sense of logic and to start using your powers to reason and admit that you cannot know that gods exist and that of all the Christian sects none have any form of reliable ‘truth’. This doesn’t mean that the supernatural doesn’t exist but it does mean that you cannot be sure of what you believe. With all the variations on such things you must agree that you could be wrong. Your only real hope is to accept that and admit that the truth is currently unknown. Be patient and logical, but continue to search but don’t jump to ‘wished for’ conclusions before you have some proof and certainty.

    Cris
     
  16. Thewriter Registered Member

    Messages:
    19
    Thank you KalvinB...

    for your civilized and thought out reply. I understand your search for the truth. My own amassed volumes of history on the origins of biblical writing, hence my arrival -at what I currently believe-through process of elimination.

    And, I'm not an atheist. Just someone who has found the mythology of Christianity to be useless. The teaching of Jesus, and admittedly, this is totally subjective, is that following him meant reflecting his actions. Tolerance, concern for the underprivileged, humility, reverence for the Earth, basically everything modern day Christianity stands against. Robert Schuler has a "Crystal Palace" while we have homeless people living in third world conditions. Is it any wonder that Swaggart and Bakker get their just desserts? They, too, thought Christianity was about conversion (actually about money, but that's another topic...no, that's right, it's this one) more than about how they lived their own life.

    I tend more towards Taoism in my own beliefs, but I still believe in "ousting the Philistines" (yes, Tony1, you're included) when their actions belie their "announced" faith. Doesn't (for those who believe it) the bible say, "faith without works, is dead"? Walk the walk before you talk the talk.

    Another aside to Sir Loone (I'm sure I'm not the first to see the appropriateness of THAT name); Spelling bad loudly is still bad spelling. Your posts are irritating never mind ignorant.

    Peace...
     
  17. Patman just one of the lost Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    123
    tony1, Sir Loone, where are you?

    I don't have a bible handy new or old testament. So I was hoping to here from our resident bible quoters.

    Thewriter

    I like your point of view.

    Cris

    Do you really think there is a sect that is right or even close?


    One of my biggest beefs with this church is the fact that the new priest got rid of the organ that was donated to the church to buy a 250,000 dollar used pipe organ. Then cries that they need a new roof. Oh! and now they also need a community building the rectory is not enough. Give me, Give me, Give me.......
     
  18. Cris In search of Immortality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,199
    Patman,

    Do you really think there is a sect that is right or even close?

    It cannot be shown that the supernatural exists. Therefore –

    1. I cannot know if any sect has the right message.
    2. No sect can know that it has the right message.
    3. No one can know if any sect is close.

    Does that help?

    Cris
     
  19. tony1 Jesus is Lord Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,279
    *Originally posted by Patman
    Big dilemma. I understand that a donation to the church that you attend is necessary for them to continue there service. But if you don't mind can you tell me why they ask for a percentage of your pay and give a chart listed by annual income to tell you how much you should give?
    *

    Some people can't figure out what 10% is.

    In any case, it is about learning about the concept of sowing and reaping.
    You can drive by a farmer's field and wathch a farmer plant a single seed among many.
    At harvest time, he reaps a crop of 10, 20 or 30 times his seed.

    You probably aren't a farmer, but you can give your money as a seed.
    At harvest time, you reap may times what you plant.

    For some reason there is great resistance to such a simple concept, hence the need for charts.

    *If you can please remind me of how Jesus was a humble, non-materialistic servant of god.*

    Who said he was non-materialistic?

    And when they were come into the house, they saw the young child with Mary his mother, and fell down, and worshipped him: and when they had opened their treasures, they presented unto him gifts; gold, and frankincense, and myrrh.
    (Matthew 2:11, KJV).

    He was only about two, when kings opened their treasures to him.
    Many people would be glad to be funded by only one king, but here Jesus was funded by three.

    He sat by the treasury to see how much money people threw in.

    And Jesus sat over against the treasury, and beheld how the people cast money into the treasury: and many that were rich cast in much.
    (Mark 12:41, KJV).

    *What do you think about these people trying to buy their way into heaven? *

    Who's trying to buy their way into heaven?

    *Now after writing this I feel some what sick to my stomach.*

    I'd feel somewhat sick to my stomach if I were to give money to the Catholic church, too.

    However, I'm thinking that you wish to hang on to "your" money.
    Do so if you wish, but just keep in mind that stinginess and miserliness are both considered "bad" things.

    Picture how long a farmer would stay in business if he refused to plant seed.

    *Originally posted by Godless
    So next time you are sitting in church, remember that monies collected go to do a lot of good, as well as make the man running the church wealthy!.
    *

    I'm thinking that would only be a problem if you were thinking you want a slice of the pie.
    Well, dream on.
    Atheists aren't scheduled to get a slice any time soon.

    A good man leaveth an inheritance to his children's children: and the wealth of the sinner is laid up for the just.
    (Proverbs 13:22, KJV).

    *Originally posted by Thewriter
    Tony1 has been challenged a number of times to state his beliefs and always follows with a biblical quote while ducking the issue.
    *

    Sciforums mythology, perpetrated mostly by tiassa, and some others.
    My belief is right above my avatar, and the biblical quote is my belief, or am I being just too obvious for atheists and antichristians to understand?

    *And before he responds with his usual ineptitude and sarcasm (and his childish, "I know you are but what am I...") replies I implore him to follow Tiassa's advice and take some reading comprehension courses.*

    Don't let anyone call you an "independent thinker."
    You're merely mouthing words from felix, tiassa and a whole group of "non-conformist, independent thinkers" whose mental Xerox machine is stuck on "copy."

    *I wrote a loonnng post based on research on the history of the writing of the bible and you responded by questioning my validity.*

    Oh, I apologize for your thin skin.

    *Show me one that does not operate at a high profit margin and I'll be willing to be open minded enough to explore it.*

    The high profit margin is guaranteed by God.

    But he shall receive an hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions; and in the world to come eternal life.
    (Mark 10:30, KJV).

    Incidentally, hundredfold return means 10,000% return.

    Who in their right mind would want to be poor?

    *Originally posted by Godless
    i'ts just not easy demonstrating this to Kalvin or Tony1, "which I might add" has'nt been around lately.
    *

    Relax, you don't have to demonstrate it to me, since I'll tell it to you.
    You atheists are getting the short end of the stick, and believers will end up with all of it.
    It's all your own choice, too.

    *Originally posted by Cris
    When the British Empire was being built the military leaders of the time had a fundamental and successful strategy – divide and conquer. As an atheist I suspect I have little to fear from Christianity becoming a unified force again, all the signs are that the numerous disagreements resulting in hundreds of sects will ultimately end in total disarray and irrelevance.
    *

    This is one of those ironically perceptive statements you are so good at providing.
    We Christians have little to fear from antichristianity becoming a unified force, seeing as its efforts are dissipated in atheism, agnosticism, atheists arguing that agnosticism is actually atheism, atheists arguing that atheism is actually agnosticism, as well as all of the sects you mentioned, along with Catholicism, Mormonism, ad nauseam.

    How antichristianity can even identify Christianity as its enemy is almost incomprehensible.
    Of course, your "anti" Christian arguments are a good example of the result.
    It is practically raining straw as you blast one strawman after another into smithereens.

    *a powerful underground upwelling of free-thinkers.*

    Only an atheist could see it as such.
    There is a random fog of delusion drifting across the landscape from time to time.
    Perhaps that is what you are referring to?

    *This doesn’t mean that the supernatural doesn’t exist but it does mean that you cannot be sure of what you believe.*

    Irony.
    We are sure that what you believe is wrong for sure, though.

    *Originally posted by Thewriter
    My own amassed volumes of history on the origins of biblical writing, hence my arrival -at what I currently believe-through process of elimination.
    *

    I can see why you may have been a little miffed at my dismissal of your research.

    *I still believe in "ousting the Philistines" (yes, Tony1, you're included) when their actions belie their "announced" faith. Doesn't (for those who believe it) the bible say, "faith without works, is dead"? Walk the walk before you talk the talk. *

    Of course, walking the walk, and walking the talk, is how I know the Bible is true, and God is real.

    *Originally posted by Patman
    I don't have a bible handy new or old testament. So I was hoping to here from our resident bible quoters.
    *

    No prob.
    Don't forget my debating style is "argumentum ad schedule" at least according to Cris.

    *Originally posted by Cris
    It cannot be shown that the supernatural exists. Therefore –

    1. I cannot know if any sect has the right message.
    2. No sect can know that it has the right message.
    3. No one can know if any sect is close.
    *

    Great, Cris.
    Since one cannot prove that the supernatural exists, any knowledge that is based on the assumption that it doesn't, is equally faulty.
    Any field of science which implicitly or explicitly bases any conclusion on the absence of the supernatural is faulty.

    Therefore, you have proven again that your knowledge is faulty, along with every field of science.
    Thanks.
     
  20. Godless Objectivist Mind Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,197
    Tony1 as usual, no brains to answer without your quide!!

    Well glad to see you back anyways, and thanks for the laughs, lol, wow, you really got me runing to give my paycheck to a worthless priest driving a Mercedes while his flock is washing cars to raise even more money for him, oops the church, Ya right.
     
  21. Cris In search of Immortality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,199
    Tony1,

    I think you are agreeing with me to a point since you also see the 100s of Christian sects posing chaos for Christianity, is that correct? But Christianity has been around for 2000 years and is now well on its way to massive multiple fractures and dissolution. Atheism and other non-belief philosophies have been largely persecuted for that 2000 years and it is only relatively recently that such groups are becoming organized. The clear trends are: Christianity is fracturing into mutually opposing sects, while non-belief organizations are rapidly grouping together and finding common causes.

    Sorry I don’t understand what you are talking about. You need to explain your assumptions a little better please.

    This looks like sarcasm, but I think you simply do not understand. Please ask a more direct question.

    What is it that you think I believe? I have told you little to nothing of what I believe. My atheist position is certainly about what I disbelieve of your claims. I have not offered you alternative claims. How can you be sure of what I believe is wrong if you don’t know what I believe?

    No that is really very wrong and quite a classic mistake.

    For example: If I assume that an immaterial invisible green elephant does not exist because no one has ever shown any evidence of its existence and is therefore highly unlikely that it is standing on the road in front of me, then I will feel perfectly safe to continue driving. Exactly the same reasoning can apply to your immaterial invisible god. Unless you can show anything that proves that he exists then it is perfectly logical to proceed and assume that that entity does not exist.

    If we lived our lives worrying about the infinite number of things that cannot be shown to exist then we would simply cease to do anything. There is no onus on me to prove that such things do not exist. You have made the claims for the existence of a god and therefore if you want others to believe and change their lives accordingly then you MUST provide proof or remain silent until you can.

    In the same way that I do not wish to spend any effort trying to prove that immaterial invisible green elephants do not exist, then the same applies to proving that your god does not exist. This of course in no way implies that I positively believe that such elephants or gods do not exist since no one has proved such claims. For all I know such elephants or gods might exist. But until someone shows some proof I will assume they do not exist and will disbelieve your claims accordingly. This is atheism. Well at least it is where gods are concerned. I’m not sure what disbelieving in supernatural elephants might be called.

    No again for the same reason and argument given above. But I think I can see what you are trying to say and is the same reason why you still do not understand the description of atheism. I’ll re-state what I think you are trying to say.

    Any field of science which implicitly or explicitly bases any conclusion on the assumption that the supernatural has been proved to not exist is faulty.

    Do you understand the important difference?

    Again do you see why this statement has no relevance or truth?
     
  22. tony1 Jesus is Lord Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,279
    *Originally posted by Godless
    runing to give my paycheck to a worthless priest driving a Mercedes while his flock is washing cars to raise even more money for him, oops the church, Ya right.
    *

    The point isn't the other guy's wealth.
    The point is your poverty.

    You sound like a farmer who refuses to plant any seed because the earth already has enough seed.
    Well, that may be true, but for sure you are going to have no harvest.

    *Originally posted by Cris
    I think you are agreeing with me to a point since you also see the 100s of Christian sects posing chaos for Christianity, is that correct?
    *

    I agree with your overall point to a very great extent.
    However, I don't see 100s of "Christian" sects as posing a problem for Christianity.

    You see, a sect member who does not believe the Bible, is lost to Christianity anyway, but isn't likely to be working against Christianity, since he thinks he is Christian.
    He will be working against atheism, though.

    A person who does not become converted to atheism, will in all likelihood, be working against atheism.
    In addition, even converts to atheism will be working against atheism, because they are actually agnostics, don't care, or some other reason, or lack thereof.

    *But Christianity has been around for 2000 years and is now well on its way to massive multiple fractures and dissolution.*

    Well, it appears that way for sure, but isn't.
    Catholicism, for example, represents Christianity for many people.
    If it were to splinter into a hundred sects, that wouldn't affect Christianity in the least, since Catholicism isn't Christianity.
    Many people would assume that Christianity were falling apart, but it wouldn't be anymore than if someone took your auto registration tags from your car and put them on another car, and then blew that car up.
    There might be some who think that your car was destroyed, but you wouldn't be one of them.

    *Sorry I don’t understand what you are talking about.*

    You write much stuff which you think is antichristian.
    On closer inspection, it is anticatholic, anti-your-last-church, antimuslim, antireligious in general.
    But because you don't know what Christianity is, you miss your target, and blast all of the nearby strawmen into pieces.

    *I think you simply do not understand.*

    Many atheists think that Christians do not understand.
    From the atheist's POV, it is easy to see why.
    However, Christians get to sit back and watch as the atheists sink into personal poverty, misery and anguish.

    *What is it that you think I believe? I have told you little to nothing of what I believe. My atheist position is certainly about what I disbelieve of your claims. I have not offered you alternative claims. How can you be sure of what I believe is wrong if you don’t know what I believe? *

    You may need large quantities of information delivered to you in order to understand an opposing claim, but not everyone is in that position.
    You have stated, among other things, that you hope to achieve some semblance of immortality via mind uploading, sort of like photocopying slices of your brain in order to live forever.

    *No that is really very wrong and quite a classic mistake.

    For example: If I assume that an immaterial invisible green elephant does not exist because no one has ever shown any evidence of its existence and is therefore highly unlikely that it is standing on the road in front of me, then I will feel perfectly safe to continue driving. Exactly the same reasoning can apply to your immaterial invisible god. Unless you can show anything that proves that he exists then it is perfectly logical to proceed and assume that that entity does not exist.
    *

    That is in itself a classic error.

    Your assumption that there are no immaterial invisible green elephants happens to be correct, but inadvertently so.
    It isn't correct because of any great reasoning power of yours, but because there aren't any immaterial invisible green elephants.

    However, your extension of that to God is a classic example of argument by denial of the antecedent.
    You are assuming that absence of proof of God implies absence of God.
    Furthermore, you are arguing petitio principii, also.
    Your assumption that there is no God is based on the assumption that there is no proof and that the proof does not exist because there is no God.

    *Any field of science which implicitly or explicitly bases any conclusion on the assumption that the supernatural has been proved to not exist is faulty. *

    While I wasn't trying to say that, that is also correct.

    *Again do you see why this statement has no relevance or truth?*

    Since your entire argument is based on a fallacy, you have only proven that you lack a basic grasp of logic, and you have proven my statement true.
     
  23. Cris In search of Immortality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,199
    Tony1,

    No that isn’t what I am trying to say. I’ve copied the following text from another thread that I think more clearly explains my position.

    Assume that a variable Q can be either 1 or 2. Where a value of 1 means that god exists and 2 means that god does not exist. If neither of us can determine the contents of Q then neither of us can claim that god exists or does not exist. Your position is that you are claiming that Q=1 but you cannot prove it. My position is that since you cannot prove that Q=1 then I am not going to believe you, further I maintain that Q could still be 1 or 2. What I am not claiming is that Q=2 which is what you think I am claiming.

    So no matter how hard you claim that Q=1 I will refuse to believe you until you can prove your case.

    Is that clearer?

    Cris
     

Share This Page