The sheep challenge

Discuss the Christian Faith.
User avatar
AnneBoleyn
Posts: 6632
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by AnneBoleyn »

sheep: "My point was only to show that people, in the field of quantum physicists, are coming to the conclusions that (I) have."

I don't have the time now to properly read your post, as I must go out, but am compelled to say your opening sentence above gives me a good impression of you personally, that you are calm & even-tempered.

Read you later!
User avatar
High Threshold
Posts: 2856
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am

The sheep challenge

Post by High Threshold »

sheep;1452663 wrote: And the difference between to disbelieve and not believing is?


You're joking right? Are you seriously saying that you don't know the difference? Lord have mercy on us all.
Bruv
Posts: 12181
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:05 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by Bruv »

I am losing the will to live.



And this thread was all my own fault, self inflicted torture...................is that a mortal sin ?
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by sheep »

High Threshold;1452657 wrote:

"Denial" has nothing to do with it. If you cannot prove existence (and you, sheep - clearly CANNOT) then denial is another thing all-together. Your English is lacking comprehensive understanding. To "believe" or "disbelieve" are bookends (so to speak) around which "not BELIEVING" is nestled. You very obviously do not understand this concept and it is causing you a mountain of frustration.


Existence of consciousness is proven by itself, it is a first truth and is the only thing that one can know for sure. Which part of this is not understood by yourself? Conscious awareness of oneself is all that can be proven. If you can not prove the possibility that something may not exist, only its existence is what can be believed.

The ball is in your court: enjoy.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12431
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

The sheep challenge

Post by LarsMac »

Bruv;1452669 wrote: I am losing the will to live.



And this thread was all my own fault, self inflicted torture...................is that a mortal sin ?


It should be.

:)
Control is an illusion. The Chaos is all part of the fun.
-Susan Hattie Steinsapir
fuzzywuzzy
Posts: 6596
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 5:35 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by fuzzywuzzy »

As you guys know I haven't been around for a bit but I almost keeled over when I saw that Bruv had begun a 'God' thread.

All I can say is that the shearing sheds are the most ungodly place for sheep. The only time you'll hear any holy words, is when a shearer exclaims to the heavens, "Jesus effing Christ ya barstard!!!!!" when a large ewe or wether won't settle down.
User avatar
High Threshold
Posts: 2856
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am

The sheep challenge

Post by High Threshold »

Bruv;1452669 wrote: I am losing the will to live.




Dear me. :yh_worry

sheep;1452670 wrote: Existence of consciousness ...... is the only thing that one can know for sure.


The only thing that one can be sure of is your ability to drive sane men to suicide. :yh_ttth
Bruv
Posts: 12181
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:05 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by Bruv »

fuzzywuzzy;1452675 wrote: As you guys know I haven't been around for a bit but I almost keeled over when I saw that Bruv had begun a 'God' thread.

All I can say is that the shearing sheds are the most ungodly place for sheep. The only time you'll hear any holy words, is when a shearer exclaims to the heavens, "Jesus effing Christ ya barstard!!!!!" when a large ewe or wether won't settle down.


Why?

Don't you think I'm intellectual enough or something?
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
fuzzywuzzy
Posts: 6596
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 5:35 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by fuzzywuzzy »

I don't think intellect comes into it when talking of 'God' things
Bruv
Posts: 12181
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:05 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by Bruv »

fuzzywuzzy;1452685 wrote: I don't think intellect comes into it when talking of 'God' things


So you've read all the thread then?
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
fuzzywuzzy
Posts: 6596
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 5:35 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by fuzzywuzzy »

Nope, but I could sum it up anyway. 'Is there a god? Yes? No? .................and round and round we go . :) Only difference between threads is how vicious it gets
fuzzywuzzy
Posts: 6596
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 5:35 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by fuzzywuzzy »

Hmmmm okay I'll bite . why not, it's 5:30 in the morning and I'm bored.

Gospel according to Saint Megan.

And loe!! Here innith the shearing shed. And the flock they did trot, to the alter of the shearer to be made well and clean from the burs and thistles of the vast paddocks. And yay there was much sighing and nashing of teeth. For the shear-eth bade, come unto me and I shall washeth away the evil of the burs and thistle so we may all lord in the outcome of the summerth and the money.



Here endeth the lesson
Bruv
Posts: 12181
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:05 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by Bruv »

Hope you are not tring to lower the tone.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
fuzzywuzzy
Posts: 6596
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 5:35 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by fuzzywuzzy »

I could try typing in a higher voice.



If I wasn't a smartarse you'd think I was sick. And what's wrong with my parable anyway?
gmc
Posts: 13566
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:44 am

The sheep challenge

Post by gmc »

sheep;1452642 wrote: Yes and since the only undeniable fact is that you exist, as you cannot deny your own existence, and seeing you are finite and must have come from somewhere, it is more reasonable to believe in an eternal first cause, than to believe in something which may or may not be real.



What can you prove as real? Only your own existence. What is not a fact, but an assumption? that what you are seeing is real.

See previous posts for further clarity: if still needed.


No it's not. You just don't know to decide to believe in god is something you prefer or want to do rather than live with the inescapable conclusion that you just don't know.

That's fine of that's what you want to do but it is not a more or even a reasonable reasonable choice no matter how you want to dress it up.

If consciousness is all that can be proven it is not alone sufficient justification for assuming that this is the result of purposeful, intelligent design by a supernatural being god or whatever you care to call it.

If you can not prove the possibility that something may not exist, only its existence is can be believed.


That is total nonsense If you can't prove the possibility that something may not exist that doesn't mean it's existence can be believed. It means you, since you are making the claim that something exists, must be able to prove that it does.

Think about it can't prove the possibility that something may not exist


How can you possibly argue it makes it reasonable to believe it does. I can't prove there isn't a flying spaghetti monster either why not believe in that?
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by sheep »

Dear gmc, I have heard your argument before, that is why I phrased my statement the way I have.

I stated: sheep;1452670 wrote: If you can not prove the possibility that something may not exist, only its existence is can be believed.


If you look at it, you will see that your statement does not fit my statement: as a reasonable argument.

You stated gmc;1452694 wrote: I can't prove there isn't a flying spaghetti monster either why not believe in that?


I can prove the possibility that a flying spaghetti monster does not exist: as you have absolutely no reference to there being a flying spaghetti monster. So how can it exist?

Just as the burden of proof is upon me to prove the reasonableness of my beliefs, so is the burden of proof upon the one making the claims of a fact to defend their claims. Is it possible that flying spaghetti monsters do not exist? Yes. Is it possible that the person reading this post can make the claim to themselves that they do not exist? No. See the difference?
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
Bruv
Posts: 12181
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:05 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by Bruv »

Mr sheep........................you may have my untimely death on your conscience, if you continue boggling my brain with your logic.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
fuzzywuzzy
Posts: 6596
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 5:35 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by fuzzywuzzy »

Bruv;1452723 wrote: Mr sheep........................you may have my untimely death on your conscience, if you continue boggling my brain with your logic.


Dear gmc, I have heard your argument before, that is why I phrased my statement the way I have, and if you look at it you will see that your statement does not fit my statement: as a reasonable argument. you stated ............

that there is not logic, it's gobbledigook and says nothing about nothing

I've now read through this thread and it seems I was right int he first place. Excuse me whilst I go stare at my navel for a bit.
Bruv
Posts: 12181
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:05 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by Bruv »

fuzzywuzzy;1452724 wrote: ............ Excuse me whilst I go stare at my navel for a bit.


Why is always blue fluff ?
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
fuzzywuzzy
Posts: 6596
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 5:35 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by fuzzywuzzy »

Bruv;1452727 wrote: Why is always blue fluff ?




I wouldn't know about that one Bruv. I've never had fluff in my navel before. Blue you say?
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by sheep »

fuzzywuzzy;1452724 wrote: ............

that there is not logic, it's gobbledigook and says nothing about nothing

I've now read through this thread and it seems I was right int he first place. Excuse me whilst I go stare at my navel for a bit.


I love how people make statements but don't show their work.

I stated: sheep;1452721 wrote: I can prove the possibility that a flying spaghetti monster does not exist: as you have absolutely no reference to there being a flying spaghetti monster.

So how can it exist? Just as the burden of proof is upon me to prove the reasonableness of my beliefs, so is the burden of proof upon the one making the claims of a fact to defend their claims. Is it possible that flying spaghetti monsters do not exist? Yes. Is it possible that the person reading this post can make the claim to themselves that they do not exist? No. See the difference?


gmc stated: gmc;1452694 wrote:

If you can't prove the possibility that something may not exist that doesn't mean it's existence can be believed...

How can you possibly argue it makes it reasonable to believe it does. I can't prove there isn't a flying spaghetti monster either why not believe in that?


I contend gmc has not thought this argument through properly, as I have shown in my argument: showing his statement is not a good analogy to properly argue against what I have claimed.



The original statement in question was: sheep;1452670 wrote: If you can not prove the possibility that something may not exist, only its existence is what can be believed.


This last statement is what is being contended and I have yet to hear a valid argument showing this statement incorrect.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
fuzzywuzzy
Posts: 6596
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 5:35 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by fuzzywuzzy »

I love how people make statements but don't show their work.


Listen ere boy!!! I don't have to show YOU anything . This is first year Philosophy student crap and not worth any ones time. And that statement just proved it.
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by sheep »

fuzzywuzzy;1452744 wrote: Listen ere boy!!! I don't have to show YOU anything . This is first year Philosophy student crap and not worth any ones time. And that statement just proved it.


I love this... for years I have heard atheists claim: people that believed in God have no proof that a God exists and seen nothing but disdain from them. Now, show that it is the Atheists that are on a groundless foundation and the above kind of statements are the types of things that come out of their mouths.

Common miss fuzzywuzzy, you can surely disprove the words of such an ignorant soul that claims, not only is there a God, but that claims, it is the Atheist that is the one that base their belief totally upon quicksand.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
User avatar
High Threshold
Posts: 2856
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am

The sheep challenge

Post by High Threshold »

Bruv;1452692 wrote: Hope you are not tring to lower the tone.


Naw, that's not really her tring at all.

Bruv;1452727 wrote: Why is always blue fluff ?


Let's ask the fluff. If it is conscious of itself then it might prove otherwise, seen from its own perspective naturally. I'm sure the answer lies in our own ability to realize the consciousness of fluff, in general, and unless we can prove that fluff does not posses that quality then we'll have to assume that it does. Let's put the question to the boy called Sheep, shall we?
User avatar
High Threshold
Posts: 2856
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am

The sheep challenge

Post by High Threshold »

sheep;1452135 wrote:

1. I think I can show it is more reasonable to believe in God than to believe in the world you actually see.

2. There is only 1 provable fact: consciousness.


I love how people make statements but don't show their work.



sheep;1452746 wrote: ... for years I have heard atheists claim


All of 2?
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by sheep »

High Threshold;1452749 wrote: Naw, that's not really her tring at all.

Let's ask the fluff. If it is conscious of itself then it might prove otherwise, seen from its own perspective naturally. I'm sure the answer lies in our own ability to realize the consciousness of fluff, in general, and unless we can prove that fluff does not posses that quality then we'll have to assume that it does. Let's put the question to the boy called Sheep, shall we?


Try to not twist statements.

Sheep stated: "If you can not prove the possibility that something may not exist (eg. your conscious self), only its existence is what can be believed."

If you did not read the posts made in this thread, you would think that the Atheist would embrace this ideology to prove the belief in the physical world's absoluteness...lol

Can a conscious person reasonably ascertain they don't exist? Is there a sane person that can logically make the claim they don't? tic-toc, tic-toc...

http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/chris ... ost1452670
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by sheep »

High Threshold;1452750 wrote: I love how people make statements but don't show their work.




The person to whom that comment ("I love how people make statements but don't show their work".) had absolutely zero discussion that was dedicated to proving anything. Please don't try and make dishonest comparisons between the intent of my posts and the person's post, to whom that quote was initially directed.

Number 1 is the original challenge to which this thread is dedicated to proving and number 2 is a statement made after many other statements where made dedicated to proving that fact. Try comparing apples to apples and not apples to figments of your imagination.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
User avatar
High Threshold
Posts: 2856
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am

The sheep challenge

Post by High Threshold »

sheep;1452751 wrote: Try to not twist statements.




No "twisting", these are quotes ...... note the quotation points surrounding your words, if you are in anyway unsure.

sheep;1452751 wrote: 1. "I think I can show it is more reasonable to believe in God than to believe in the world you actually see."

2. "There is only 1 provable fact: consciousness."


Still waiting for the part when "you can show" and also waiting for the definable point of "provable fact".

I love how people make statements but don't show their work. Will today be the day that you lay it all out before us - to gaze in awe, wonder and admiration? :yh_rotfl
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by sheep »

High Threshold;1452753 wrote: No "twisting", these are quotes ...... note the quotation points surrounding your words, if you are in anyway unsure.



Still waiting for the part when "you can show" and also waiting for the definable point of "provable fact".

I love how people make statements but don't show their work. Will today be the day that you lay it all out before us - to gaze in awe, wonder and admiration? :yh_rotfl


You are referencing the wrong post to which my comments were directed too.

As for "Still waiting for the part when "you can show" and also waiting for the definable point of "provable fact."" Try looking back on my posts, they have been answered. Good Night.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
User avatar
High Threshold
Posts: 2856
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am

The sheep challenge

Post by High Threshold »

sheep;1452752 wrote: Again, Consciousness is an assumed first truth ....


So you've back-peddled to "an assumption" now, have you? Now we're getting somewhere. But you are being awfully dishonest by saying "Again" - an American habit used to deny your earlier assertions. There is no "again" at all. This is the first time you use it, meaning that your words are beginning to reach your head ....... thanks to a couple of us who are determined not to let you go unscathed for your frivolous disregard for something called "fact".



sheep;1452752 wrote: Consciousness, on the other hand, can explain the eternal without contradiction.


"Without contradiction"? Still waiting for the proof of this statement .......:yh_wait
User avatar
High Threshold
Posts: 2856
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am

The sheep challenge

Post by High Threshold »

sheep;1452754 wrote: As for "Still waiting for the part when "you can show" and also waiting for the definable point of "provable fact."" Try looking back on my posts, they have been answered.


You most certainly HAVE NOT answered any of these.
gmc
Posts: 13566
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:44 am

The sheep challenge

Post by gmc »

sheep;1452746 wrote: I love this... for years I have heard atheists claim: people that believed in God have no proof that a God exists and seen nothing but disdain from them. Now, show that it is the Atheists that are on a groundless foundation and the above kind of statements are the types of things that come out of their mouths.

Common miss fuzzywuzzy, you can surely disprove the words of such an ignorant soul that claims, not only is there a God, but that claims, it is the Atheist that is the one that base their belief totally upon quicksand.


You have no proof that god exists. If you could prove it there would be no need for faith (that is belief in something that is not based on proof). If you are happy with that then by all means believe in god it's your choice. I can accept you want to believe that and if it gives you some kind of comfort good luck to you. It doesn't alter the simple reality that you cannot prove that god exists. The burden of proof is on you to suggest that because atheists cant prove he doesn't means he must therefore exist and it is more reasonable to believe that is an absurdity to put it mildly. The disdain you think you receive from non-believers is in your own mind what you see is frustration at the mindset that will not listen to reason and the intolerance shown by the religious to all those who disagree.

Even if you could prove god exists how many of the worlds religions would accept that proof if it conflicted with their particular ideologies? We'd have a whole set of new reasons for religious wars.

The problem most non believers have with religion is the insistence by the various religions that their beliefs should not be questioned or the conflicts caused by religion are somehow noshing to do with those belief systems the fault of and that all must be forced to agree with them. It's an age old argument that's why most countries have had or still have blasphemy laws religious authorities can only maintain their grip through fear and social sanction.
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by sheep »

gmc;1452761 wrote: You have no proof that god exists. If you could prove it there would be no need for faith (that is belief in something that is not based on proof). If you are happy with that then by all means believe in god it's your choice. I can accept you want to believe that and if it gives you some kind of comfort good luck to you. It doesn't alter the simple reality that you cannot prove that god exists. The burden of proof is on you to suggest that because atheists cant prove he doesn't means he must therefore exist and it is more reasonable to believe that is an absurdity to put it mildly. The disdain you think you receive from non-believers is in your own mind what you see is frustration at the mindset that will not listen to reason and the intolerance shown by the religious to all those who disagree.

Even if you could prove god exists how many of the worlds religions would accept that proof if it conflicted with their particular ideologies? We'd have a whole set of new reasons for religious wars.

The problem most non believers have with religion is the insistence by the various religions that their beliefs should not be questioned or the conflicts caused by religion are somehow noshing to do with those belief systems the fault of and that all must be forced to agree with them. It's an age old argument that's why most countries have had or still have blasphemy laws religious authorities can only maintain their grip through fear and social sanction.


As stated before: If you can not prove the possibility that something may not exist, only its existence is what can be believed. Can a sane person reading this post deny their own existence? No. All that can be proven is consciousness: prove anything else is a fact. Since you cannot, I continue to assert that it is far more reasonable to believe in God then the universe you see.

Try making an argument, that is grounded on facts, that can refute this. I hear nothing but chirping from you birds.

P.S. No one is talking about the character of God here. I have many Muslim friends and we have discussions all the time about the things I have discussed in other places on the site and they agree with me that organized religion, and government, are the 2 great evils of the world and that personal religion is an admiral endeavor. They even agree that the practical implementation of the teachings of Christ withing one's life are agreeable to causing peace withing oneself and the relationships they have with others and that all men should embrace them.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by sheep »

High Threshold;1452750 wrote: I love how people make statements but don't show their work.


This has been stated before:



If you can not prove the possibility that something may not exist, only its existence is what can be believed. Can a sane person reading this post deny their own existence? No. All that can be proven is consciousness: prove anything else is a fact. Since you cannot, I continue to assert that it is far more reasonable to believe in God then the universe you see.

Try making an argument, that is grounded on facts, that can refute this. Consciousness awareness of oneself is all that can be proven. Again, if something can unequivocally not be denied it must be true. The only fact anyone can absolutely know for sure, beyond a shadow of a doubt(Beyond the shadow of a doubt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia), is one's own consciousness.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
Bruv
Posts: 12181
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:05 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by Bruv »

sheep;1452762 wrote: If you can not prove the possibility that something may not exist, only its existence is what can be believed. Can a sane person reading this post deny their own existence?


I hope you are happy now...........................my head has just exploded!!!!!
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
User avatar
High Threshold
Posts: 2856
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am

The sheep challenge

Post by High Threshold »

gmc;1452761 wrote: You have no proof that god exists. If you could prove it there would be no need for faith (that is belief in something that is not based on proof).


I'm not sure if you thought that through - or simply got lucky - but that is a statement to be taken seriously and there is more truth and logic in that than just about anything else that's been brought up in this thread so far.
User avatar
High Threshold
Posts: 2856
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am

The sheep challenge

Post by High Threshold »

sheep;1452763 wrote: This has been stated before:



If you can not prove the possibility that something may not exist, only its existence is what can be believed. Can a sane person reading this post deny their own existence? No. All that can be proven is consciousness: prove anything else is a fact. Since you cannot, I continue to assert that it is far more reasonable to believe in God then the universe you see.




This has been stated before:



If you can not prove the source of something you can see, and don't really know if it even exists in the first place, then proving the source of the uncertain existence of something will be even less likely to be proven by a source that is not only questionable but cannot be seen nor proven to exist. Can a sane person reading this post deny the lack of credible effort in trying to prove that a non-proven entity's source is an un-seen, un-proved, un-provable, illogical contributor to the fabrication of an object of uncertain existence?

Since you cannot, I continue to assert that it is far more prudent to dépêcher pour la pub before last call than to repeat your same old non-sens that no one is buying anyway. :yh_loser
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12431
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

The sheep challenge

Post by LarsMac »

Bruv;1452764 wrote: I hope you are happy now...........................my head has just exploded!!!!!


Good. That should release a lot of the gobbledegook that has been getting stuffed in there.

You should feel much better now.
Control is an illusion. The Chaos is all part of the fun.
-Susan Hattie Steinsapir
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by sheep »

High Threshold;1452773 wrote: This has been stated before:



If you can not prove the source of something you can see, and don't really know if it even exists in the first place, then proving the source of the uncertain existence of something will be even less likely to be proven by a source that is not only questionable but cannot be seen nor proven to exist. Can a sane person reading this post deny the lack of credible effort in trying to prove that a non-proven entity's source is an un-seen, un-proved, un-provable, illogical contributor to the fabrication of an object of uncertain existence?

Since you cannot, I continue to assert that it is far more prudent to dépêcher pour la pub before last call than to repeat your same old non-sens that no one is buying anyway. :yh_loser


The problem with your statement is that we are not uncertain of consciousness. On the contrary, we are absolutely certain of our own consciousness and that is where your argument breaks down. Consciousness is unseen and so again your argument continues to be founded upon wrong assertions.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
User avatar
High Threshold
Posts: 2856
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am

The sheep challenge

Post by High Threshold »

sheep;1452780 wrote: The problem with your statement is that we are not uncertain of consciousness.


The problem with this statement of yours is that neither you (nor anyone else) has ever proven that consciousness exists. So, in essence ...... you are either lying ...... or have been terribly misinformed.
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by sheep »

High Threshold;1452782 wrote: The problem with this statement of yours is that neither you (nor anyone else) has ever proven that consciousness exists. So, in essence ...... you are either lying ...... or have been terribly misinformed.


Everyone is now laughing at you, so maybe you should stop making a fool of yourself in public...lol

So sad.

P.S. In time I think even you will come to see that as one of the dumbest statements ever made in history.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12431
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

The sheep challenge

Post by LarsMac »

sheep;1452783 wrote: Everyone is now laughing at you, so maybe you should stop making a fool of yourself in public...lol

So sad.


Er, um, I don't think it is HT that is the target of all the laughter.
Control is an illusion. The Chaos is all part of the fun.
-Susan Hattie Steinsapir
User avatar
High Threshold
Posts: 2856
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am

The sheep challenge

Post by High Threshold »

sheep;1452783 wrote: Everyone is now laughing at you


Shhhhhhh, please ..... :yh_shhhh ..... I can't hear any laughter - can you?
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by sheep »

LarsMac;1452785 wrote: Er, um, I don't think it is HT that is the target of all the laughter.


I think you will have to write yourself up lasrmac.

Reason: ... insult... what ever happened to "Be kind to each other, tenderhearted..."

P.S. you think that consciousness hasn't been proven too? Do you also deny your own existence?
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by sheep »

High Threshold;1452782 wrote: The problem with this statement of yours is that neither you (nor anyone else) has ever proven that consciousness exists. So, in essence ...... you are either lying ...... or have been terribly misinformed.


Do you also deny your own existence? That is the only thing that can be assumed from such a statement. That is clearly the most retarded (in the real sense of the word) statement I have ever heard.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
gmc
Posts: 13566
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:44 am

The sheep challenge

Post by gmc »

sheep;1452762 wrote: As stated before: If you can not prove the possibility that something may not exist, only its existence is what can be believed. Can a sane person reading this post deny their own existence? No. All that can be proven is consciousness: prove anything else is a fact. Since you cannot, I continue to assert that it is far more reasonable to believe in God then the universe you see.

Try making an argument, that is grounded on facts, that can refute this. I hear nothing but chirping from you birds.

P.S. No one is talking about the character of God here. I have many Muslim friends and we have discussions all the time about the things I have discussed in other places on the site and they agree with me that organized religion, and government, are the 2 great evils of the world and that personal religion is an admiral endeavor. They even agree that the practical implementation of the teachings of Christ withing one's life are agreeable to causing peace withing oneself and the relationships they have with others and that all men should embrace them.


I don't need to prove the possibility that something may not exist. It does not exist therefore there is no need to prove that it might not. You are the one claiming god exists you have to prove that he does asking others to prove the possibility that something may not exist is just a way of dodging the issue. You have said nothing to prove the existence of god. If he does exist where is the evidence?

P.S. No one is talking about the character of God here.




Well no of course not do you seriously expect us to discuss the nature of something that does not exist?

islam and christianity have similar schisms in that they fall out with other christians/muslims over whether the way to salvation is by personal religion or by following an organised one that tells them what to believe. Maybe the absurdity of religious people killing each other other over who has the right of it when it comes to worshiping their imaginary friend is prove that god exists and has a sense of humour.
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12431
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

The sheep challenge

Post by LarsMac »

sheep;1452787 wrote: I think you will have to write yourself up lasrmac.

Reason: ... insult... what ever happened to "Be kind to each other, tenderhearted..."

P.S. you think that consciousness hasn't been proven too? Do you also deny your own existence?


I believe that I have demonstrated some restraint, here, but if you are truly insulted, I apologize, and I shall write up that infraction for myself, posthaste.

But I have to say, My friend, that I have been waiting for you come out with the punchline here. Surely you jest.

I cannot remember the last time I witnessed such a willful abuse of the concepts of 'logic' and 'reason'.

And, I neither confirm, nor deny my own existence.

In my experience, my consciousness and my existence are often completely irrelevant to each other.

I can also say that, while I believe in God, I do not see that as any more or less reasonable than believing what I see, or perceive.

(still waiting for you to show that)
Control is an illusion. The Chaos is all part of the fun.
-Susan Hattie Steinsapir
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by sheep »

gmc;1452792 wrote: I don't need to prove the possibility that something may not exist. It does not exist therefore there is no need to prove that it might not. You are the one claiming god exists you have to prove that he does asking others to prove the possibility that something may not exist is just a way of dodging the issue. You have said nothing to prove the existence of god. If he does exist where is the evidence?




The discussion is regarding the reasonableness that God exists... Let's use your argument regarding the physical world "It does not exist therefore there is no need to prove that it might not." In the same way that dreams don't exist.

There is greater reason to believe that God exists, then the physical world, as only one thing can be claimed to be fact and that is the consciousness that one possesses. This is the bases for this whole discussion and I have yet to hear anyone make a claim that can prove that the physical world can be proven apart from consciousness. But here, I will help you do that, by quoting someone that has published that consciousness can not be known apart from the beholding of what it sees.

He quotes Paul Natorp: EinleitungindiePsychologie, 1888, pp. 14, 112:

"The existence of consciousness, although it is the fundamental fact of psychology, can indeed be laid down as certain, can be brought out by analysis, but can neither be defined nor deduced from anything but itself."

To which he states: "Now my contention is exactly the reverse of this. Experience, I believe, has no such inner duplicity; and the separation of it into consciousness and content comes, not by way of subtraction, but by way of addition -- the addition, to a given concrete piece of it, other sets of experiences, in connection with which severally its use or function may be of two different kinds."

Classics in the History of Psychology -- James (1904)

The problem is that without consciousness one only has innate matter and no awareness. The fact that we do have awareness of self, does not prove the existence of matter, it only proves the existence of self.

I am trying to help you out here, but the case is a useless one: as your case is beyond hope.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by sheep »

LarsMac;1452795 wrote: I believe that I have demonstrated some restraint, here, but if you are truly insulted, I apologize, and I shall write up that infraction for myself, posthaste.

But I have to say, My friend, that I have been waiting for you come out with the punchline here. Surely you jest.

I cannot remember the last time I witnessed such a willful abuse of the concepts of 'logic' and 'reason'.

And, I neither confirm, nor deny my own existence.

In my experience, my consciousness and my existence are often completely irrelevant to each other.

I can also say that, while I believe in God, I do not see that as any more or less reasonable than believing what I see, or perceive.

(still waiting for you to show that)


See my last post, as it shows the problem with having no medium (conscious awareness) to view the physical world. All we can know for sure is our existence and while we need some sort of medium (sensual experience) to be able to know ourself, it is not the experience that is absolute, but the consciousness that is absolute.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
Bruv
Posts: 12181
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:05 pm

The sheep challenge

Post by Bruv »

Lower case sheep I must thank you for giving me the most entertaining and enduring thread I have ever started.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth

Return to “Christianity”