Congratulations to President Joe Biden

I should like to offer my condolences to Donald Trump.

Sadly, I don't speak to losers, I prefer winners...



Uh oh, schadenfreude overload

DrLiveLogic:
do you think there is anything you could learn from Mr. Flew?

Could I learn anything from a dead apologist and their book that wasn't even written by him because he was suffering from dementia? I'm guessing no.

---

DrLiveLogic:
Ordered as per marked by order...

That isn't particularly helpful at answering my question [Is order/ordered a binary property?]

I don't see how the answer can be anything other than:
[1] Yes
[2] No
[3] I don't know.

Maybe you could try again.

Also, it is probably a mistake to use the word "order", to describe order as you did above if you want anyone else to understand you.

2.30 am EST Watching Trump ironically ranting against the powers that be that his voters are being disenfranchised because the states he thinks he has already won have not been tabulated for the night. In his mind he has already won and is a victim again. Maybe he will win but not all the votes have been counted. The fat lady hasn't sung yet.

…And he is taking the issue to his Supreme(ly Stacked) Court

Obviously the best thing electing Donald Trump did was to get Americans paying attention to politics.

Kobojunkie:

Challenging religious doctrines?
Pointing out the absurdities of religious beliefs?
Asking for evidence?
absence of logic in most religious beliefs?

Did someone remove the sign on the door or what? Last I checked, the sign read "Religion", not "Philosophy" nor "Logic"/"Critical reasoning".

Stop the whines already. My intentions were made perfectly clear in the OP from the start:

Tamaratonye5:
I have often heard hedonism decried by pretentious superstition, but can someone offer any rational or moral reason why pursuing earthly sensual and self indulgent pleasures is to be avoided?

I mean as long as no one else is harmed or exploited to obtain them, where’s the harm? I mean what else is there anyway?

Rational answers needed please

If you knew you couldn't comply to the terms given at the beginning of the thread, and had no compelling rational or moral argument to give besides religious rhetoric, you could have just avoided the thread instead. Your failure to read and understand the OP is nobody's fault here. Stop embarrassing yourself.
-----------------------------------------------------------

Kobojunkie:
Anywho...moving on now ....

Yes, please, move on. You have no point.

Kobojunkie:
Again, "Religion" is the sign on the door, and last I checked "Christianity, is one of many religions to expect discussed in a religious forum. Hence the reason why I offered you the Christian answer to your question.
However, I see now that you are not even here for a religious view but instead are looking for "evidence", so again, I wonder if you have your senses on right for you to seek such in a forum on "religion"

..And again, I don't see how my discussing in the "Religion" section prevents me from challenging religious doctrines and ideas.

There are people who believe that faith and reason are mutually inclusive. Any reluctance to reconcile both is simply a pointer to the absence of logic in most religious beliefs, and it's no fault of mine. If you don't like me pointing out the absurdities of religious beliefs and asking for evidence, it's no skin off my nose.

Either way, I've modified my OP accordingly. So please feel free to ignore.

jesusjnr2020:
Please try and move on I have already made it clear to you that I don't have much time to waste on a hopeless case.

Perhaps you don't know that the person you're dealing with is someone who has a track record here of turning atheists into believers... So when I don't give it any push, it means I don't see the point in doing so.

You need a complete mental surgery or to repent first for me to even consider giving your case any shot, because you're lost beyond the point where you could be possibly found.

So until then, you can keep speaking to yourself.

As an ex-evangelical christian, quantities of converted atheists don't impress me. Been there done that, my dear, to my regret.

Do you concoct and tell lies once you convert atheists Jesusjnr2020? Is it your style to pressure your converts with the horrors of eternal torment and the way they could die tomorrow? Or is it your style to just tell them the big bang, evolution and abiogenesis is bunk before they beg for redemption? Is it your style to tell them your "God" knows when they’ve told lies? Or is it your style to tell them your "God" loves them and just neglect to elucidate the little print about the non-negotiable transactional duties and requirements for that "unconditional" love?

Curiously you seem to be as far beyond redemption as I am

You made up, then told a lie, not as a problem of religion, but just a lucid outright laze of someone else’s life to vainly bolster your proud little argument against us poor atheists, and you're incapable of admitting it. I do know it bothers you because you refuse to say it or offer even a word of justification.

Akiane’s parents weren’t atheists were they? Why did you insist they were? Don’t kid yourself that i will be able to ever forget or allow you to.

Have you asked yourself why you're in denial over that lie, Jesusjnr2020? Maybe if you'll be able to admit your failing you'll be able to get on together with your converting with one less dark lie hanging over your heart. You recognize you may feel better. Just admit your lie and that we need never mention it again. Unless you switch up next time and tell another intentional blurter.

Kobojunkie:
In case you missed it, the sign on the door said "Religion" on your way in. If responses not based on religious beliefs weren't what you wanted, then you are in the wrong place. I mean seeking evidence on a religious forum, are you sure you are in your right senses?

Yes. "Religion" is the title of this section. Not "Christianity", mind you. Get a dictionary. As vast and as large as it is, Christianity shouldn't necessarily hold the monopoly on religious topics, or what do you think..?

The title of this section of the forum is "Religion". Alright then..... So? I don't see how it should stop me from challenging religious ethics or beliefs in my post content/s.

I've modified my OP. If you're feeling uncomfortable with my criticism of religious ideas, you're not mandated to take part in the discussion.

DrLiveLogic:
Been a long while here.

Likewise. Welcome back

DrLiveLogic:
...the closer you are to admitting that this ordered universe...

[1] Is ordered a binary variable? Like True/False? If so can you give an example of something that is not ordered?

[2] If ordered isn't a binary property: what exactly are you comparing the universe against, to see that it is ordered?

I suspect you are using ordered as a weasel word

Kobojunkie:
Well, the most obvious reason there is is that it runs counter to the teachings of Jesus Christ who commanded that all those who will follow Him must DIE TO SELF.

Why would I care what people claim an individual called Jesus may or might not have thought?

Your claim is as removed from obvious as I can imagine to be honest.

Kobojunkie:
All of these and more cannot be accomplished by one with a hedonistic attitude towards living, as is clearly evidenced by the Christian world around you today.

I do hope that’s meant as irony, as it’s hilariously wrong. the most important oldest Christian church, is one among the richest institutions on the earth ffs, or what about televangelist multi millionaires..?

Kobojunkie:
In simple terms Hedonism is antiChrist in every way and form.

So what? That's not a rational argument against hedonism.

Kobojunkie:
However, if Jesus Christ is not your goal,........

I do not indulge in fantasy creatures. I have higher and loftier standards

Kobojunkie:
.............then feel free to indulge as much as you like. The way I see it, the majority in the world we live in, already practice just that - you will be in great company.

It seems fitting you finish that post with another broad and unevidenced claim. Though again, it’s not a cogent argument against hedonism.

Dtruthspeaker:
And in this, I have alwsys been Honest and Truthful, for there are many here waiting to catch me in a wrong or a Lie!

"A wrong"?

Wtf is "a wrong"?

Dtruthspeaker:
I Know! All the atheists in Nigeria are former Christians.

Dtruthspeaker:
And in this, I have alwsys been Honest and Truthful, for there are many here waiting to catch me in a wrong or a Lie!

And there you're, caught in a very sad lie. Boy that was easy. Oh, sorry, That WaS EAsy.

Dtruthspeaker:
What type of Christians were they? Answer- Follow-follow Christians, who acted without knowing and understanding why they act,

There you go, idiotic arrogant unevidenced assumption. What a very stupid claim, even for you.

The rest of that disjointed rant is indecipherable cryptic gibberish. Though it’s what I've come to expect from your posts.

Dtruthspeaker:


If you want hard T ruths like the earth under your feet, for you do not stand or walk on air, therefore my answer is this;

I K now! All the atheists in Nigeria are former C hristians.

What type of Christians were they? Answer- F ollow-follow Christians, who acted without knowing and understanding why they act, but they simply did what they were told to do.

Which was their F law for their being U nfounded, made them stand on a tables, until a wild kid like me came to shake that table vigorously, U ntil you all fell and broke your hands and feet, then did you see (as if you did not see before) that what you thought was a ground (for you did not know that it was a table) was broken up by sound K nowledge

Neither did you guys realise that you fell from a table T o T he S olid G round! If not you would have been falling forever, B ut that has not been P rovided by O ur C reator, so all men M ust F all into H is G round.........

The capitalization of words or letters is something we do to administer a clue to our meaning, to assist communicate our ideas to other. However: random capitalization does the alternative. It makes your message much harder to receive. Seriously, if you were to get rid of the shift key from your computer, it might lead to an enormous improvement to your writing, making your message much easier to grasp.

jesusjnr2020:
The fact remains that the purpose of this thread which is to prove a baby doesn't need indoctrination to be religious as atheists think has been accomplished, and you'd need to live with that!

If the purpose of this thread is to convince me that theists like you are capable of altering the facts of a story to suit their agenda. Yes, Jesusjnr2020, you succeeded. All you have done is drag the already murky reputation of jesus advocates one step closer to the sewer. Why do you do this?

I do not claim possession of any special wisdom. At best I only claim imperfect knowledge of this world. And I can only determine the truth of things by applying an examination of things presented and eliminating that which is obviously untrue and reserving things that comply with what I have already determined as true and those due to the limit of my understanding and knowledge, deserving further examination.

The real issue here has more to do with the processing of information. Your version of Akaine’s story as a theological prodigy born and raised by atheist parents has been shown, even by the very references you supplied to be totally untrue, and you inaccurately emphasised in several places her parents were atheists. They were not. If you are unable to admit that you got the story wrong, why should anyone be convinced you are capable of discerning any sort of any transcendent truth or wisdom?

I also note that despite the inaccuracy of your version of her story being shown out to you point black, you have avoided addressing that particular issue. Your on the matter is a sign of denial. Not a good look for a proponent of truth. I don’t have to necessarily think you are being dishonest here, I could think you have profound trouble objectively comprehending information and deriving conclusions that don’t fit your very subjective religious view of reality.

In any case childhood indoctrination is over-rated and doesn’t always work for the benefit of any purpose, religious or political. Many atheists are proof of that. The atheist argument is that religious childhood indoctrination is equivalent to brainwashing and does not produce true believers but rather automaton adherents incapable of making deliberate informed and honest choices.

Child prodigies are well evidenced. Five and four year old Korean children performing violin concertos; six year olds presenting complex mathematical calculations worthy of college students, or displaying confident fluency in several languages all make me feel good as evidence of our collective potential.

However I have never come across a story about a four year old who was conversant in the basic tenets of Christianity, or independently identified the existence of the Trinity, like Jesus is said to have done in the temple, discussing finer points of Mosaic Law with the priests, but then that story is such an incredible account worthy of a divine it is used to show how different Jesus was to mere humans. Instead, I have only heard, in some cases first hand, cute, innocent stories of talking, or playing, with Paddington Bear, or Tinkerbelle, never Jesus or Buddha. Innocent childhood fantasies, some told with the sole intention of pleasing or impressing parents.

Jesusjnr2020, before you can attempt to convert others with your perception of truth, you have to understand what truth is, and here is a hint: it is not dishonestly altering the life stories of others to suit your personal narrative.
The purpose of this thread as you stated has not been achieved, because the argument was a strawman.

jesusjnr2020:
Do not be surprised that the Truth sounds ludicrous to you when your brain has been programmed only to be able to comprehend lies and falsehood.

You’ve offered no objective evidence to suggest your conclusion from your unevidenced anecdotal story are true. Your arrogant assumption those that hold opposing views have got flawed reasoning is quite frankly, an ad hominem fallacy, and an hilarious one given the indoctrination religions have always used, and also the blind faith they champion.

jesusjnr2020:
If you believe my efforts are directed at hopeless cases like yours, you think very wrong

Don’t you think that you ought to have done just a bit fact checking before posting this little bit of nonsense? You hear a story, have an emotional reaction thereto, think it proves your position and flee all halfcocked able to do battle for your lord and you haven’t got an opportunity.

I took the time to test the facts before posting a reply, as did most other atheists here. The article you posted is media hype at the best and a trial at Christian propaganda to sway the ignorant in its worst form. From commencing to end, it's bullshit. an easy Google search will provide you with Akiane’s life history likewise because the history of her family. the actual fact that you simply sit here and keep trying to defend this crap just causes you to seem like an idiot. Your story has been ripped apart and demonstrated beyond all reason to be stuffed with holes, fallacious, and an outright lie. The longer it takes for you to work that out, the more ignorant you appear. If you had any real evidence supporting your inane claim, you'd have posted it rather than resorting to bullshit comments about the "truth souding ludicrous." the reality never sounds ludicrous because it is backed by facts and evidence that are undeniable and there's not a competing theory that gives a much better explanation of all those facts and evidences. that's why you'll be able to call it truth. You've got no such information during this bullshit story or your bullshit assertions.

This is what I call a correct pooh throw. Whether you keep polishing the turd you showed us or not, either way, you have shown remarkable fecal crafting abilities.

You may use the toilet again.

Lovely story about a pretty girl with great artistic talent and a persistent faith in her god and her determined marketing strategy. I note that one amongst her pencil sketches at age five is entitled "The Business Man". At age five i might assume it's a portrait of her father, who probably organised her marketing plan, practising Catholic or not.

Does it provide any evidence against atheism? No.

In a round about way you are simply championing the old flimsy idea of the innate knowledge of god argument, that guarantees we've got all been hard wired by god before birth to know he exists and thus cannot claim ignorance as a defence for being unworthy horrible sinners inside.

So I read Akiane’s story, studied her paintings (interestingly displayed by age, beginning with self portraits at age four) and i am not convinced that her talent or her faith are accustomed to disprove anything. i'm still an atheist and Jesusjnr2020 you proved nothing but your relentless desire to prove that which simply can't be proven or disproved.

Give it up mate, you're making yourself look ludicrous.

Its simply one more story of someone with incredible talents unable to just accept their gifts as being directly because of the person they're or how they perceive their world, and are impelled by their own acquired insecurities and doubt, to project the source of that talent outside themselves. Sort of like one who has been convinced they're incapable of being good or moral or complete and literally hoping on an unsubstantiated power outside themselves as monitored by professional spiritual interpreters.
Its the equivalent of claiming "I cant be good with out God" when one says "I cant be an exceptional artist without having art lessons from Jesus."

Tamaratonye5:
Can you demonstrate any objective evidence for any deity?

Still waiting for any sort of answer from Dtruthspeaker?? You have ignored my question countless times, though I can guess why.

Dtruthspeaker:
And that is my case you have just established for me, No Man Is Qualified to Challenge or Question The Validity of He Whom we call God, just as the Phone can not challenge its ownership in the hands of man

I’ve challenged it for crying out loud, you just can’t or won’t recognise the rationale used.

Dtruthspeaker:

Tamaratonye5 post=93906331:

This an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy. No claim assertion or belief is validated because it can’t be disproved. The claim is irrational by definition.

It is not a fallacy because because I was laying Up A True Fact which is Seen not for the purposes of giving validity but to direct that all men are Automatically Disqualified from commenting on the validity of these matters.

It is a fallacy, I suggest you look it up and reread your original claim here=>

Dtruthspeaker:
No man is in a Position to validly Rebut this Claim because You Do Not Know Anything About How You came about

As I said, no claim is validated because of a lack of contrary evidence, thus your claim is the very definition of an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy, and is therefore by definition irrational…

Seriously go and educate yourself. If you don’t understand a common logical fallacy like an appeal to ignorance fallacy no wonder your posts are irrational tosh.

Dtruthspeaker:
Therefore, everyone is entitled to their own preference.

That one is called a straw man fallacy. Again I urge you to look it up and try to understand what it means.

Tamaratonye5:
The first paragraph is just bizarre, how does anything in it remotely evidence any deity?

I’ll repeat this as your unintelligible disjointed rant doesn’t address my question at all. Go back and read what you said, then explain how you think it evidences any deity.

Your posts suggest you’re either barking mad or trolling, I can’t decide yet, but there is no objective evidence that anything in nature is designed, and your phone & car analogies are asinine nonsense.

Dtruthspeaker:


Wrong! This is the interpretation of the matter.

"My brother's ex wife" meaning she is single and free to mingle, without limitation.

What has that straw man attempt to troll a response got to do with your erroneous claim, or my refutation?

Dtruthspeaker:

Tamaratonye5: Exodus 21 describes in detail how to buy and own slaves, and how you beat them to death, as long as they don’t die within 24 hours of the beating.

The old testament abounds with instances of the deity portrayed in it committing acts of indiscriminate murder and genocide. See the Noah’s flood myth as one example. The deity tortured King David’s newborn baby to death in the bible, because it was angered that the baby was conceived in an adulterous affair.

Have you even read the bible?

You are Wrong!

Quoted verbatim from your bible in Exodus 21

21 “Now these are the rules that you shall set before them.
When you buy a Hebrew slave,


6 then his master shall bring him to God, and he shall bring him to the door or the doorpost. And his master shall bore his ear through with an awl, and he shall be his slave forever.

So you're talking bollocks, Dtruthspeaker

Dtruthspeaker:
For first, you must Remember that No People knew God and Understood His Ways.

Yet you claim to know that about the deity you believe in, hilarious that you don’t seem to see the ironic contradiction.

Dtruthspeaker:


The Bible Never Advocated or Commanded the doing on any one of Such! But you have passed Judgment without a fair trial and there is no appeal before you, so it is vain and needless to answer you.

Exodus 21 describes in detail how to buy and own slaves, and how you beat them to death, as long as they don’t die within 24 hours of the beating.

The old testament abounds with instances of the deity portrayed in it committing acts of indiscriminate murder and genocide. See the Noah’s flood myth as one example. The deity tortured King David’s newborn baby to death in the bible, because it was angered that the baby was conceived in an adulterous affair.

Have you even read the bible?

Dtruthspeaker:
As I said earlier "to use the Property belonging to Another Person as if it is your own exclusively, is very offensive!

My brother's ex wife having met someone else, is divorcing him and will take every penny he has, as well as a chunk of his pension, and the law entitles her to do it, despite the fact she’s lived off him for 20 years, hasn’t contributed a penny towards either, or a single household bill or the mortgage, as he owned the house before they met, they have no children.

So your claim is woefully wrong

Dtruthspeaker:
No man is in a Position to validly Rebut this Claim because You Do Not Know Anything About How You came about,

This an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy. No claim assertion or belief is validated because it can’t be disproved. The claim is irrational by definition.

The first paragraph is just bizarre, how does anything in it remotely evidence any deity?

Dtruthspeaker:
As Camry and iPhone can Never Know to say that you are not the Creator of them and that it is Mr Toyoda and Steve Jobs.

Again this is bizarre, but we have overwhelming objective evidence that phones are designed and manufactured by humans. We generally also now when something is designed as they don’t occur natural. Humans like all living things evolved, there is no objective evidence that any living thing was designed.

ThothHermes:
How do you practice hedonism without harming someone?

Why would it necessarily?

Dtruthspeaker:


The Bible advocates for Balance and Reasonable Pursuits of Happiness, so that you hurt no one whether your fellow man or Your Owner, The Lord God, Who has only granted and given you permission to use His Things in a Reasonable Way.

That is what the Bible Counsels, for your continuous good preservation.

The bible also advocates slavery, and portrays a vicious capricious deity, that commits indiscriminate mass murder, even torturing a new born baby to death at one point to punish its parents for conceiving it in an adulterous affair, and causing a global genocidal flood. All the while encouraging its followers into acts of evil ethnic cleansing, and the sex trafficking of female prisoners. So your claim is baffling.

Besides, why should I care what the bible says anymore than any other work of fiction?

Can you demonstrate any objective evidence for any deity?

Tmach137:

@ bolded - This is the caveat. Generally speaking a hedonistic person will also be narcissistic. Everything for me and other people do not matter. The hedonist has no idea when she or he is hurting other people. People with the capacity to care for others probably do not adopt hedonistic philosophies.

I’m not sure they’re entirely mutually exclusive, are they? I mean there are biological restraints on just how relentlessly we can pursue pleasure, but it strikes me that the times when I have enjoyed myself the most was when I could share those pleasures with others, especially those I care about.

After all what is more self indulgent than enjoying the company of those we care for and love. I guess it’s a balance between what we want, and what others need from us.

I have often heard hedonism decried by pretentious superstition, but can someone offer any rational or moral reason why pursuing earthly sensual and self indulgent pleasures is to be avoided?

I mean as long as no one else is harmed or exploited to obtain them, where’s the harm? I mean what else is there anyway?

Rational answers needed please

Modified