Religious

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

All this nonsense...and still no explanation of why Buddhism is "self-defeating"...or even "self-refuting".

You said that all religions, except for Christianity, are self-defeating. Now I am eager to see how long it will be before you supply a real explanation.

I am on to you, Boxcar. I know why you like to give vague answers like these. You do it in order to buy yourself some time...so you can search for the REAL answers on Wikipedia. Good luck.

You demand answers from me, yet you don't want to give any. I've asked you the different accounts of the two thieves violated the Law of Noncontradiction and you come up with nothing. But still insist that the accounts are inconsistent. No doubt because you say so, but you can't prove it.

Then I asked you what is so difficult about understanding what self-defeating statements are and three times have given you an example, yet you can't tell us if you see anything a wee bit odd in the example statement I provided.

Tell ya what...you deal with both these issues and give me answers and then I'll get back to you on Buddhism, providing of course you can even tell me what flavor of Big Bud you like.

[Greyfox]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

And Boxcar's version of Christianity dictates that all those whom God has not predetermined to "save" in this life, will spend all eternity in a fiery hell. This doesn't sound "self-defeating" to you?

Heaven, if you choose to be a believer, would not be self-defeating.
According to boxcar, it's your call.
(However, he's previously said that all of that is predetermined prior to your birth.)

[Greyfox]

Originally Posted by TJDave

Atheism is not a faith. It is the absence of belief that any deities exist.

This is the huge mistake that humans have made for centuries.

Atheism is a faith.
It is a faith that God doesn't exist.
Like all other faiths it can't be proven or dis-proven.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Hank

Huh, No Boxie I don't. A wise man once said that there are three tiers of human intellect.1. A tiny group of geniuses 2. A larger but still small group capable of comprehending what members of the first group are talking about.3 The largest group by far,EVERYONE else. Your posts represent Mountains of evidence supporting the conclusion that you are a life long member of group 3.As a consequence you make asinine statements like "all the world's philosophies are self-defeating because they are grounded in falsehoods. Every single one of them violate the Law of Non-Contradiction."
And brilliant Christians like Augustine and Aquinas appreciate and utilize the work of great philosophers. No one had to do their Knowing or thinking for them.

Here's a clue for you in a way of a syllogism, which is perfectly biblical I might add. Ready?

No sinner has any true understanding.
All sinners are darkness.
Therefore, all sinners' philosophies find their ground in ignorance.

And you, sir, love the ignorance of the Kants of the world. His philosophy sends a thrill up your leg and tingles down your spine, does it?

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

This is the huge mistake that humans have made for centuries.

Atheism is a faith.
It is a faith that God doesn't exist.
Like all other faiths it can't be proven or dis-proven.

BINGO! You are absolutely correct. Atheists actually believe something about God. They believe He doesn't exist.

In fact, Fox, if you think about these two statements carefully, you can unearth exactly why it's a self-defeating philosophy or world view. Hint: Think about what the statement presupposes.

[Ocala Mike]

Opinion piece that works for me:

http://www.alternet.org/story/148555...heism_a_belief

My beliefs? Fast horses, good bourbon, and beautiful women - not necessarily in that order, and pretty much in short supply to me lately!

[TJDave]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

It is a faith that God doesn't exist.

No. There is no empirical evidence that deities exist...or unicorns or fairies. Show me some and I'll change my mind.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by boxcar

BINGO! You are absolutely correct. Atheists actually believe something about God. They believe He doesn't exist.

So...according to you, all of us must believe something about Santa Claus. After all...we all believe he doesn't exist, right?

[Greyfox]

Originally Posted by TJDave

No. There is no empirical evidence that deities exist...or unicorns or fairies. Show me some and I'll change my mind.

There is no empirical evidence that God doesn't exist.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

This is the huge mistake that humans have made for centuries.

Atheism is a faith.
It is a faith that God doesn't exist.
Like all other faiths it can't be proven or dis-proven.

Just as there are "real" Christians and "pretend" Christians...there are "REAL" atheists", and "pretend" atheists.

The "pretend" atheists have as much "faith" in their atheistic beliefs as the religious have in their religious beliefs...and these "pretend" atheists relish getting into religious debates, so they could prove the validity of their views. THOSE are the "faithful atheists" that you are talking about.

But the REAL atheists regard God in the exact same manner that we look at Santa Claus. He doesn't exist...and talking about him is either an amusing fable...or a gigantic waste of time.

[Greyfox]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

So...according to you, all of us must believe something about Santa Claus. After all...we all believe he doesn't exist, right?

Gads. Say it isn't so. Are you saying that there is no Santa?

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

There is no empirical evidence that God doesn't exist.

Must we assume that EVERYTHING might exist unless empirical evidence could be found to prove that it doesn't?

Is empirical evidence needed to prove the EXISTENCE, or the non-existence of things?

There is a lot more "empirical evidence" proving the existence of UFOs than there is proving the existence of God, and yet, the believers in God greatly outnumber those who believe in the existence of UFOs. Is that logical?

[Greyfox]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Is empirical evidence needed to prove the EXISTENCE, or the non-existence of things?

That's a question that you should direct to TJ Dave who said:

"There is no empirical evidence that deities exist.."

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

That's a question that you should direct to TJ Dave who said:

"There is no empirical evidence that deities exist.."

No...I think that question is better directed towards you...because it was you who stated that "there is no empirical evidence that God doesn't exist".

TJ's comment shows that empirical evidence is needed to prove the EXISTENCE of things...which is also what I think. Your comment, on the other hand, suggests that we need empirical in order to DISPROVE the existence of things.

When you make the comment that "there is no empirical evidence that God doesn't exist", then you are suggesting that "Bigfoot" might also exist...since the "empirical evidence" hasn't ruled out HIS existence, either. After all...more people have gone on record claiming to have seen Bigfoot, than to have seen God.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

Heaven, if you choose to be a believer, would not be self-defeating.
According to boxcar, it's your call.
(However, he's previously said that all of that is predetermined prior to your birth.)

How can it be "my call"...if everything is predetermined prior to my birth?

Greyfox...are you sure you haven't been standing too close to Boxcar lately? His disease might be contagious, you know...