-->
@janesix
My knowledge is irrelevant.
There is no such thing as an Atheists.
Posts
Total:
518
-->
@Mopac
Then stop making the claim that you know what ultimate reality is.
-->
@janesix
I know what I am saying. Do you know what I'm saying?
How about this, can you confess The Ultimate Reality?
-->
@Mopac
What do you mean by "confess"?
-->
@janesix
Admit that The Ultimate Reality exists.
That there is a reality as it truly is. Reality in the truest sense.
-->
@Mopac
I am sure that an ultimate reality exists. I doubt that you or I nor any other human knows or understands that reality.
-->
@janesix
Ok.
So now you can say God exists.
That is the only point I am making.
The Ultimate Reality is what God means.
Whether I or anyone else understands that reality is sommething else entirely.
-->
@Mopac
Ok.So now you can say God exists.That is the only point I am making.The Ultimate Reality is what God means.Practical implications is something else entirely.
Spinoza's god exists.
Noumenon exists.
Ontologically linking god with "The Truth" or "Ultimate Reality" or "noumenon" does nothing to solve the practical implications.
Awesome. You've convinced me. Mopac's GOD exists.
Now what.
-->
@Mopac
The Ultimate Reality is what God means.
No it doesn't.
All you are doing is playing with words. You are saying nothing of substance.
DESCRIBE "Ultimate reality". Explain how you came by this description.
-->
@3RU7AL
For this particular thread, I would like to stay on this topic.
Not everyone has turned in their quiz.
-->
@janesix
You are the one playing with words.
And since you are being arbitrary, this is what you get..
THE ULTIMATE REALITY IS WHAT I ACKNOWLEDGE AS GOD.
My God exists. Catch up.
-->
@Mopac
I am not playing with words. You are. I readily admit I don't know the nature of the ultimate reality.
You say it is "God" but that isn't saying much.You blow a lot of smoke out of your ass.
Where do you get your knowledge from, Mopac? 1691 posts, and you haven't said SHIT.
-->
@Mopac
For this particular thread, I would like to stay on this topic.Not everyone has turned in their quiz.
If you're trying to prove the (debate resolution) topic "There is no such thing as an Atheists." by redefining the word "god" to mean "reality" you are basically pursuing a DEISTIC (and or pantheistic) position.
DEISM (and or pantheism) is functionally identical to ATHEISM.
Not to mention,
In order to qualify as an atheist, you only have to disbelieve in one or more gods.
Do you believe in Zeus? Ok, then you are an atheist regarding Zeus.
Do you believe in Nanabozho? Ok, then you are an atheist regarding Nanabozho.
-->
@3RU7AL
Deism can be classified as a subset of theism, not atheism. If atheists don't exist, naturally the appropriation of atheism is off the mark as an outlook. I'm not convinced that atheism is impossible in humans, however
-->
@Plisken
Deism can be classified as a subset of theism, not atheism. If atheists don't exist, naturally the appropriation of atheism is off the mark as an outlook.
The argument is not that deism is a subset of atheism.
The argument is that deism is functionally identical to atheism.
And, unless you believe in all possible gods, then you are an atheist regarding the gods you disbelieve (and or simply lack faith) in.
-->
@3RU7AL
Lets entertain this claim. Humans have to take the position of a god to conduct philosophy in respect of natural law via atheism.
If true, atheism may resemble something of a paradox classifiable as a subset of theism.
-->
@Mopac
--> @secularmerlin, @StephenNeither of you can comfess The Ultimate Reality, which is very telling.You can't admit That Which Is Ultimately Real exists.
And you don't seem to be able to explain what the difference is between reality and what you call "the Ultimate Reality".
-->
@Plisken
Ok, so if I asked you, "If Zeus struck you down with a bolt of lightning, would you die?" Do you have to believe in Zeus in order to entertain and or respond to this hypothetical?Lets entertain this claim. Humans have to take the position of a god to conduct philosophy in respect of natural law via atheism.
Ok, so if I asked you, "If invaders from Mars destroyed every government building on Earth, would you be prepared?" Do you have to believe in invaders from Mars in order to entertain and or respond to this hypothetical?
-->
@3RU7AL
Lets entertain this claim. Humans have to take the position of a god to conduct philosophy in respect of natural law via atheism.Ok, so if I asked you, "If Zeus struck you down with a bolt of lightning, would you die?" Do you have to believe in Zeus in order to entertain and or respond to this hypothetical?
Of course, because you need to make the assumption of Zeus
Ok, so if I asked you, "If invaders from Mars destroyed every government building on Earth, would you be prepared?" Do you have to believe in invaders from Mars in order to entertain and or respond to this hypothetical?
Yes.
-->
@3RU7AL
I am an Orthodox Christian. This is how we understand God.
Not deism.
-->
@janesix
I'm sorry that The Truth offends you so much.
-->
@Plisken
Lets entertain this claim. Humans have to take the position of a god to conduct philosophy in respect of natural law via atheism.Ok, so if I asked you, "If Zeus struck you down with a bolt of lightning, would you die?" Do you have to believe in Zeus in order to entertain and or respond to this hypothetical?Of course, because you need to make the assumption of ZeusOk, so if I asked you, "If invaders from Mars destroyed every government building on Earth, would you be prepared?" Do you have to believe in invaders from Mars in order to entertain and or respond to this hypothetical?Yes.
It appears you may be lacking an imagination.
I am perfectly capable of entertaining any number of imaginary hypothetical scenarios (big-foot/loch-ness-monster/space-aliens/YHWH) without making the leap to supposing they are actually real.
-->
@Stephen
The Ultimate Reality.
Reality in the truest sense
Reality as it truly is.
You can't confess The Ultimate Reality?
-->
@3RU7AL
Lets entertain this claim. Humans have to take the position of a god to conduct philosophy in respect of natural law via atheism.Ok, so if I asked you, "If Zeus struck you down with a bolt of lightning, would you die?" Do you have to believe in Zeus in order to entertain and or respond to this hypothetical?Of course, because you need to make the assumption of ZeusOk, so if I asked you, "If invaders from Mars destroyed every government building on Earth, would you be prepared?" Do you have to believe in invaders from Mars in order to entertain and or respond to this hypothetical?Yes.It appears you may be lacking an imagination.
Noted.
I am perfectly capable of entertaining any number of imaginary hypothetical scenarios (big-foot/loch-ness-monster/space-aliens/YHWH) without making the leap to supposing they are actually real.
I reason that to assume something, it cannot be ruled impossible and there must be some inkling of belief.
-->
@Mopac
The Ultimate Reality.Reality in the truest senseReality as it truly is.
Well that explains absolutely NOTHING!!!!
You can't confess The Ultimate Reality?
Confess? I honestly think you are ill.
-->
@Plisken
Is it possible to be a temporary agnostic?I reason that to assume something, it cannot be ruled impossible and there must be some inkling of belief.
It sounds like you are saying that every imaginable concept must be assumed to be a very real possibility in order for it to be entertained.
In other words, "the ontological argument" (god exists because the concept of god exists).
I disagree.
But even if I was convinced by your assertion, that only makes every possible god as real to me as Zeus is to you.
And that would seem to be setting a pretty low bar.
-->
@Stephen
So you can't even say that The Ultimate Reality exists.
How telling.
So you can't even say that The Ultimate Reality exists.
I think you cannot explain the difference between reality and what only you term "The Ultimate reality". Until you can define the difference you have nowhere to go.
Ultimately, I think you are really very ill, in reality
-->
@Stephen
Difference isn't the right word. The Ultimate Reality is reality in the truest sense of what reality means.
I think that is pretty lucid.
So you won't confess The Ultimate Reality exists?
-->
@Mopac
You use the ultimate reality as a synonym for god and since gods don't exist your ultimate reality doesn't exist