-->
@Mopac
And if we agreed on a meaning for those words that made sense in this context you would be right.
Futile
Posts
Total:
156
-->
@secularmerlin
So all I have to do to be right is to remain stubbornly in denial of what everyone else says and remain cocksure of myself?
-->
@Mopac
Actually we have to agree on definitions first otherwise we are not even having the same conversation.
-->
@Mopac
We have to agree on definitions because definitions are subjective.
-->
@secularmerlin
I do agree.
What if agreeing on definitions is not possible?
-->
@Mopac
In that case rational discussion may also be impossible.
-->
@secularmerlin
The Ultimate Reality is God.
Whatever The Ultimate Reality is, that is God.
I am more certain of God's existence than the existence of anything else.
Everything I experience could be an illusion, and I would say even likely is an illusion, but God definitely exists.
-->
@Mopac
I can agree to that definition provided it is the entirety of the definition. If however you begin adding attributes that reality cannot be demonstrated to have (like being the creator of the universe or a moral authority or the capacity to love) then you have altered your definition sufficiently that I cannot accept it until such time as these attributes can be demonstrated to me.
-->
@secularmerlin
No, that is what the word means.
So we all know God exists.
As far as these other qualities, those would be discussions about God, not the existence of God.
-->
@Mopac
If the ultimate truth is unknowable then we cannot have any conversation aboit it that consists,of anything other than conjecture.
-->
@secularmerlin
I'm sure you can get more out of it than that.
Like how to deal with it for one.
-->
@Mopac
I am unsure what you mean. Could you possibly rephrase this statement?
-->
@secularmerlin
The art of keeping it real.
Dig?
A pretty good idea.
I think what I'm really trying to say is that The Truth can be known to an extent. You might have a friend. You might know this friend really well, but do you know everything about them? No, you can't. But you can know how to be a good friend.
So it is with God.
-->
@Mopac
What does that have to do with our ongoing conversation about the nature of reality?
-->
@Mopac
So we all know God exists.
So we all know Ganesh exists.
-->
@secularmerlin
How does it not have to do with it?
I think what I'm really trying to say is that The Truth can be known to an extent. You might have a friend. You might know this friend really well, but do you know everything about them? No, you can't. But you can know how to be a good friend.So it is with God.
No it is not. I have a direct experience of my friend. Either my perceptions reflect reality and I can therefore assume my friend exists or my perceptions do not reflect reality in which case we cannot ever know anything. In niether case can we presume to know anything that is not observable and so if the ultimate reality is the only real thing and our observable reality is an illusion then we still cannot know it in any capacity whatever. That renders your definition somewhat meaningless.
-->
@secularmerlin
You apparently know enough about it to know that it is unknowable.
Maybe there is more to be known even that you aren't aware of.
-->
@Mopac
The whole point is that I remain uncertain not that I know something. We can know what is observable to us but not if our observations are real. If our observations are real then scientific method is the best method we have yet discovered for separating fact from falsehood. If not then we don't know anything and any attempt to seperate fact from fiction is futile.
-->
@secularmerlin
My three fvorite words are I don't know.
11 days later
So, after all, Jane was right.
-->
@Mopac
So we all know God exists.
An absurd claim. 2/3rds of the population of the planet know your god doesn't exist.
-->
@janesix
Of course it's futile. Since atheism is a religion there is no way to turn a religious guy into your religion.
Try to convince a jew that Jesus is his savour. Delusional!!
-->
@IlDiavolo
Are you saying religious people are closed minded? Most atheists were once theists and mostly Christians, hence Christianity is the largest contributor to atheism. Chew on that.there is no way to turn a religious guy into your religion.
Try to convince a jew that Jesus is his savour.
Yeah, especially when you have zero evidence to convince.
-->
@Goldtop
Are you saying religious people are closed minded? Most atheists were once theists and mostly Christians, hence Christianity is the largest contributor to atheism. Chew on that.
Yes, they are. And since atheists are religious it's not surprising they're close minded most of the time.
Yeah, especially when you have zero evidence to convince.
This is what I'm talking about. Lol.
-->
@IlDiavolo
It would appear you don't know the meaning of the word "Atheist", you should probably look it up so as to not sound so foolish.atheists are religious
-->
@Goldtop
It would appear you don't know the meaning of the word "Atheist", you should probably look it up so as to not sound so foolish.
I do. And judging by your comments I can see you're a fervient religious guy.
-->
@IlDiavolo
Obviously, by saying I'm religious you have no concept of atheism. Or, are you just being a troll?I do.
-->
@IlDiavolo
Atheism is not itself a religion as demonstrated by actual religious atheists (for example some buhdists are religious atheists) all atheism is is a rejection of one particular sort of claim. To be clear if you can offer sufficient evidence for said claim I would have no choice but to adjust my beliefs accordingly.
-->
@Goldtop
Troll? Look who is talking. Lol.