Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Off topic discussion about God/Islam/Questions...

1356789

Comments

  • #62
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,858 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    PDN wrote: »
    Post 35 doesn't alter the error that I pointed out, dude.

    Post 35 very clearly points out that your correction, doesn't have the intended outcome you desired, you are infact in pretty much the same situation that the original poster claimed.
    PDN wrote: »
    It refers to some argument that is nothing to do with me.

    I dont know, is it too much to expect that a mod would cop on that a post that quotes their entire previous post was directed at them? It certainly seems like you understood that, what with attempting to defend your position in posts 37 and 40. But I suppose back pedalling and insults are easier than actually responding to my original post?


  • #63
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    Post 35 very clearly points out that your correction, doesn't have the intended outcome you desired, you are infact in pretty much the same situation that the original poster claimed.

    My correction pointed out that the 'he' referred to Judah not to God. The poster thanked me for pointing that out, so it evidently did have the intended outcome that I desired. :rolleyes:

    As for anything else that you imagined I desired, I am afraid I cannot be responsible for your fantasies.


  • #64
    iBumblebeetuna
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33 ✭iBumblebeetuna


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    Post 35 very clearly points out that your correction, doesn't have the intended outcome you desired, you are infact in pretty much the same situation that the original poster claimed.


    I dont know, is it too much to expect that a mod would cop on that a post that quotes their entire previous post was directed at them? It certainly seems like you understood that, what with attempting to defend your position in posts 37 and 40. But I suppose back pedalling and insults are easier than actually responding to my original post?

    In fairness to PDN, I tried to be a smartass and I got spanked for it.

    Whether or not all someone needs to beat an opponent with god on their side is to use iron chariots is not the point I was trying to make originally, but I would agree that the text PDN quoted does certainly make it look that way.


  • #65
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,858 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    PDN wrote: »
    My correction pointed out that the 'he' referred to Judah not to God. The poster thanked me for pointing that out, so it evidently did have the intended outcome that I desired. :rolleyes:

    As for anything else that you imagined I desired, I am afraid I cannot be responsible for your fantasies.

    I never claimed that you wrong in your correction of the other poster. My post, if you would read the damn thing, pointed out that, regardless of who the "he" was in reference to, Judah with god on his side couldn't beat a group of people because they had iron chariots, thus making gods help < iron chariots, a fact which made your smugness rather bemusing.
    iBumblebeetuna wrote: »
    In fairness to PDN, I tried to be a smartass and I got spanked for it.

    Whether or not all someone needs to beat an opponent with god on their side is to use iron chariots is not the point I was trying to make originally, but I would agree that the text PDN quoted does certainly make it look that way.

    You were making the point that god is physically vulnerable to iron chariots, no? While you were a little wide of the mark, you still had a point in this. God may not be physically vulnerable to iron chariots, but he certainly has some issue with them, hence his help being ineffectual against the iron chariots.


  • #66
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    My post, if you would read the damn thing, pointed out that this was largely irrelevant. Regardless of who the "he" was in reference to, Judah with god on his side couldn't beat a group of people because they had iron chariots, thus making gods help < iron chariots, a fact which made your smugness rather bemusing.

    I really don't care whether you think it was irrelevant or not. I pointed out an error in an exchange with another poster, and he replied to me.

    If you want to argue with the Muslim guy about God and iron chariots then that's fine. I find it very entertaining. I have no dog in that fight (before some sensitive soul hits the report button, I would stress that I am not calling either atheists or Muslims dogs).

    As for smugness, I am not responsible for what you imagine about me. I do have an impressiopn of you from your posts, but I think the mods will prefer it if I stick to the Charter and address the issues in posts rather than getting personal.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,858 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    PDN wrote: »
    I really don't care whether you think it was irrelevant or not. I pointed out an error in an exchange with another poster, and he replied to me.

    If you want to argue with the Muslim guy about God and iron chariots then that's fine. I find it very entertaining. I have no dog in that fight (before some sensitive soul hits the report button, I would stress that I am not calling either atheists or Muslims dogs).

    And I am pointing out your error, but instead of refuting or accepting the error, you decide to troll with this garbage that what I said to you, quoting your post and dealing with what you said, has nothing to do with you.
    PDN wrote: »
    As for smugness, I am not responsible for what you imagine about me. I do have an impressiopn of you from your posts, but I think the mods will prefer it if I stick to the Charter and address the issues in posts rather than getting personal.

    Drop the cheap insults and just respond to post 35 without trolling.


  • #68
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    And I am pointing out your error, but instead of refuting or accepting the error,

    I didn't make any error. I pointed out that the 'he' applied to Judah, not to God. The poster in question responded by very graciously (more than I deserved) thanking me, and that is the end of the matter as far as I am concerned.

    You still have your opinion about the verse in question, and I defend your right to hold such opinions. If the Muslim guy wants to discuss that with you further then he's free to do so.
    you decide to troll with this garbage that what I said to you, quoting your post and dealing with what you said, has nothing to do with you.

    Drop the cheap insults and just respond to post 35 without trolling.

    I haven't insulted you. I've refrained from doing so, despite you getting personal with subjective jibes about smugness.

    As for trolling, I think that is up to the guys who mod this forum from the front seats to determine - don't you?


  • #69
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,858 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    PDN wrote: »
    I didn't make any error. I pointed out that the 'he' applied to Judah, not to God. The poster in question responded by very graciously (more than I deserved) thanking me, and that is the end of the matter as far as I am concerned.

    You still have your opinion about the verse in question, and I defend your right to hold such opinions. If the Muslim guy wants to discuss that with you further then he's free to do so.

    The opinion is not in relation to anything the muslim guy said, its in relation to what you said, and its directed at you, hence I quoted your post in my post. Last chance to quite trolling.
    PDN wrote: »
    I haven't insulted you. I've refrained from doing so, despite you getting personal with subjective jibes about smugness.

    Your insults are in your double talk, your need to point out how much better you are than everyone else and your smugness.
    PDN wrote: »
    As for trolling, I think that is up to the guys who mod this forum from the front seats to determine - don't you?

    It will be when I report you for it.


  • #70
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    The opinion is not in relation to anything the muslim guy said, its in relation to what you said, and its directed at you, hence I quoted your post in my post. Last chance to quite trolling.

    You commented on a Bible verse that another poster quoted, and where I pointed out an error to him.

    You might want to pick a fight with me, but I am perfectly within my rights not to so engage with a poster who seems determined to try to inject personal animosity into a debate.
    Your insults are in your double talk, your need to point out how much better you are than everyone else and your smugness.
    :(


  • #71
    legspin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,018 ✭✭✭legspin


    virmilitaris wrote: »
    I'll try and be as blunt as possible.

    - I don't believe in any deities and even if you could prove to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that your deity was real I still wouldn't worship it. It's not in my nature to be a slave and I would rather face whatever punishment your religion deems appropriate than to bend my knee for a single second to any celestial dictator, as Mr Hitchens might put it.

    It doesn't matter to me if your religion is true or not. If it's true than it's even more evil than if it were false.

    Thank you. I tried to post something like this earlier, but when I read it back to myself it just sounded like a childish rant and where it wasn't I'd just get myself banned for abuse.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,473 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    All the posts on creationism have been moved to the forum's thunderbox:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056030584


  • #73
    dead one
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,320 ✭✭✭dead one


    thebhoy wrote: »
    Don't I now, or should I just take the above as metaphors.. or maybe I have taken these quotes out of context?
    Have ever tried to read this in context, Yet many atheists deny existence of God.
    Thomas Paine wrote:
    But some, perhaps, will say: Are we to have no word of God — no revelation? I answer, Yes; there is a word of God; there is a revelation. THE WORD OF GOD IS THE CREATION WE BEHOLD and it is in this word, which no human invention can counterfeit or alter, that God speaketh universally to man.


  • #74
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,473 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    dead one wrote: »
    many atheists deny existence of God.
    In fact, that's of the few things that most atheists have in common with each other.

    Well spotted!


  • #75
    gbee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,384 ✭✭✭gbee


    robindch wrote: »
    In fact, that's of the few things that most atheists have in common with each other. Well spotted!

    I wouldn't fully agree. I don't deny the existence of God, I just don't believe in one.

    To explain, I take the word deny to mean that I know the 'truth' but have an opposing view or deny that I know it ~ in other words that I lie about what I say.

    In this context I take the phrase to mean that most atheists do believe in God but deny this fact.

    I'm not lying, I genuinely don't believe in a God and I'd throw the statement back, I also believe that most who profess a belief in a deity deny the truth.


  • #76
    Terrence Wrong Wristband
    Posts: 81,309 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Terrence Wrong Wristband


    robindch wrote: »
    In fact, that's of the few things that most atheists have in common with each other.

    Well spotted!

    That gave me a giggle :D


  • #77
    Dades
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,622 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    gbee wrote: »
    I wouldn't fully agree. I don't deny the existence of God, I just don't believe in one.
    Way to spoil a quip!


  • #78
    dead one
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,320 ✭✭✭dead one


    gbee wrote: »
    I wouldn't fully agree. I don't deny the existence of God, I just don't believe in one.

    To explain, I take the word deny to mean that I know the 'truth' but have an opposing view or deny that I know it ~ in other words that I lie about what I say.

    In this context I take the phrase to mean that most atheists do believe in God but deny this fact.

    I'm not lying, I genuinely don't believe in a God and I'd throw the statement back, I also believe that most who profess a belief in a deity deny the truth.

    Ah i guess what you are trying to say

    You don't believe in the fact "There is God" because it would acknowledge that there exists something smarter than you are.

    Isn't it true?     are Atheists inherently arrogant about their own intelligence?


  • #79
    Ghost Buster
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,172 ✭✭✭Ghost Buster


    dead one wrote: »
    Ah i guess what you are trying to say

    You don't believe in the fact "There is God" because it would acknowledge that there exists something smarter than you are.

    Isn't it true?     are Atheists inherently arrogant about their own intelligence?

    You dont guess that at all as that is not remotely what gbee implied. You are just being provocative.
    I dont disbelieve in The lochness Monster because I dont want to acknowledge that there may be a better swimmer than me.
    So no your statement is not true so where does this tiresome alligation of atheistic arrogance come from?
    We arent the one who think an uber being is personally looking out for us 27/7.

    But possible getting into semantics here. Why, if so many delusio religious people know of and have evidence for the existance of gods why do they use words such as belief and faith?
    I know my kitchen table exists. I dont have fautih or belief in its existance cos that would be stoopid!
    (And the first to bring in any existential/philosophical horse manure about the existance of my kitchen table gets this face :mad:)


  • #80
    Dades
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,622 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    dead one wrote: »
    Isn't it true? are Atheists inherently arrogant about their own intelligence?
    I believe the term you are looking for is "correct".™


    ™ Jimmy Carr


  • #81
    dead one
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,320 ✭✭✭dead one


    Ghost Buster wrote: »
    why do they use words such as belief and faith?
    Faith doesn't mean simply the recourse of an weak-minded religious nut. It is the sum and substance of any religious belief system. Faith is even the basis for the atheist’s non-belief in God. . Faith is actuality. Faith is substance. Faith is conviction.
    Ghost Buster wrote: »
    I know my kitchen table exists. I dont have fautih or belief in its existance cos that would be stoopid!
    (And the first to bring in any existential/philosophical horse manure about the existance of my kitchen table gets this face :mad:)
    .
    It means still that table exist whether you have faith in it or not. M i right?
    Will your non-belief in God remove the fact "There is God". I guess no!


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    Ghost Buster
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,172 ✭✭✭Ghost Buster


    dead one wrote: »
    Faith doesn't mean simply the recourse of an weak-minded religious nut. It is the sum and substance of any religious belief system. Faith is even the basis for the atheist’s non-belief in God. . Faith is actuality. Faith is substance. Faith is conviction.
    .
    It means still that table exist whether you have faith in it or not. M i right?
    Will your belief in God prove the fact "There is God". I guess no!

    Fixed that for ya.
    So logically the honest approach is "I dont know and am prepared to be convinced either way"
    Your belief in a book and personal gut feeling is not proof to anyone but you any more than a belief and gut feeling that aliens abducted you and did uncomfortable things with probes is proof to any one but the abductee.
    Its easy to convince your self of anything but it does not make it true.


    And no. Atheists are not CONVINCED that there is no god so dont bother:o


  • #83
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,858 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    dead one wrote: »
    Faith is even the basis for the atheist’s non-belief in God

    In what way?


  • #84
    Terrence Wrong Wristband
    Posts: 81,309 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Terrence Wrong Wristband


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    In what way?

    There is probably a leap from "all data/evidence suggests the likelihood of a god is very improbable" to "there is definitely no god" i guess


  • #85
    gbee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,384 ✭✭✭gbee


    dead one wrote: »
    Isn't it true? [/I]are Atheists inherently arrogant about their own intelligence?

    Can't speak for all Atheists. But from an early age I rebelled against my religion, I though it was nonsense, from abut age 12 on.

    I was helped in my decision by the RCC's teachings itself. It threw out Adam & Eve and for me this was impossible, as the church was infallible ~ so they could never have been wrong ~ now they changed things and fundamentally I realised their were not infallible.

    So yes, I do feel very smug ~ but I've never told you the story of my fellow classmate's time as a Bishop in Africa .. I won't bother as I feel you'd not believe the story anyway.


  • #86
    stevoslice
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,007 ✭✭✭stevoslice


    dead one wrote: »
    Faith is even the basis for the atheist’s non-belief in God. . Faith is actuality. Faith is substance. Faith is conviction.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=883t2Pac8pk


  • #87
    AhSureTisGrand
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,327 ✭✭✭AhSureTisGrand


    Can we get back to the table? It was far more interesting


  • #88
    Ghost Buster
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,172 ✭✭✭Ghost Buster


    AhSureTisGrand wrote: »
    Can we get back to the table? It was far more interesting

    My kitchen table??
    You also believe in The Table.
    Halleugha (no idea how you spell that!)

    Wine on a Thurs school night. Im a bad bad atheist:o


  • #89
    dead one
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,320 ✭✭✭dead one


    Ghost Buster wrote: »
    Fixed that for ya.

    Your belief in a book and personal gut feeling is not proof to anyone but you any more than a belief and gut feeling that aliens abducted you and did uncomfortable things with probes is proof to any one but the abductee.
    Its easy to convince your self of anything but it does not make it true.
    :o

    Try to answer your intelligence these questions. It's a challenge for your intelligence. Give your intelligence the reason of Science.When you reject belief in God, infact you are rejecting any source of confidence beyond your own level of reasoning or understanding. Your thinking will forever be questioning the origin of the universe, and will be unsure of your own destiny and purpose in life. ;)
    Francis Bacon, the famous philosopher, has rightly said that a little knowledge of science makes man an atheist, but an in-depth study of science makes him a believer in God. Scientists today are eliminating models of God, but they are not eliminating God. If you translate this into Arabic, it is La illaha illal la, There is no god, (god with a small ‘g’ that is fake god) but God (with a capital ‘G’).

    Surah Fussilat:

    "Soon We will show them our signs in the (farthest) regions (of the earth), and in their own souls, until it becomes manifest to them that this is the Truth. Is it not enough that thy Lord doth witness all things?"

    [Al-Quran 41:53]


  • #90
    dead one
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,320 ✭✭✭dead one


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    In what way?

    In this way?
    you put faith on science by rejecting the fact "There is God"?. You put your faith in science or self. You presuppose that science or self are trustworthy places for your confidence, and find corroboration for this presupposition in the evidences that you can comprehend. You believe in your own testimony rather the testimony of God i.e Quran.

    Isn't it your faith against belief in God.?


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    legspin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,018 ✭✭✭legspin


    dead one wrote: »
    In this way?
    you put faith on science by rejecting the fact "There is God"?. You put your faith in science or self. You presuppose that science or self are trustworthy places for your confidence, and find corroboration for this presupposition in the evidences that you can comprehend. You believe in your own testimony rather the testimony of God i.e Quran.

    Isn't it your faith against belief in God.?

    If your god wants us to believe the koran he /she /it had had better come up with something more conclusive than the rantings of an illiterate <mod edit> 'prophet' <snip>.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement