Proof of God's existence! 1 million dollar challenge at the end! Randi better pay-up!

[Beleth]

When you drive a car, a car goes as you will it (as God is omnipotent.). But when you hit a car, the car gets WRECKED AS WELL and the driver also gets hurt..

Do you consider that fair? I am granting that both the car and the driver get wrecked. I am granting that that is How Things Are. But do you consider that fair, or just, that the car gets damaged because of something the driver does?

So if you blaim God because of your own actions.. Why dont you blaim amino acids and your parents of your own actions..

Because God created the amino acids and the parents too. God is the root cause for all of this. The fingers of blame may make intermediate stops at other things, but in the end, they all point straight to God.

IN FACT, by your way of thinking, we should just then remove the word "FREEWILL" and "RESPONSIBILITY" for after all, amino acids and our parents created us, and its not our fault we are the way we are....

Errr, no.

You are saying that God made us all puppets, so that we are blameless for our transgressions. We suffer for them, the way the car suffers when we wreck it, but it's not our fault.
The atheist view is that there was no God to make us all puppets to begin with, so there is nobody to blame for our transgressions but ourselves.

YOU WISH GOD CREATED YOU TO BE A VEGETABLE... WHY? BECAUSE YOUR TOO STUPID TO MAKE DECISIONS FOR YOURSELF?

Isn't that your view? That we can't make decisions for ourselves, because God made us a certain way?

You are not God, you were created, ALL YOU ARE IS A LITTLE WHINING CHILD

You wish we were children.

Children would sit around attentively at your knee, with eyes wide open in wonder, listening to your nonsense and believing it without question.

But we are not like that, are we? We are adults, who can think for ourselves, and realize when we're being handed a line by someone who doesn't himself even believe the load he is spewing. And it's driving you nuts.

 

[Beleth]

Feedback is another term for recursion.

I know what feedback and recursion are. I am saying that they are not necessary. The controlled need not interfere with the controller.

That depends on whether or not I can also predict what the individual will do based on the new information I have given them.

*sigh*
A declaration based on interference is CONTROL, not prediction.
I have rarely felt more like a parrot.

If I you show me your lottery ticket, and I accurately predict that it is a winner, how can you claim that I am not predicting?

You are predicting in this case. Your prediction has nothing to do with me. It only has to do with the ticket, and you are not interfering with the ticket.

Let's say we're at the 7-11 and I haven't bought a lottery ticket yet. You point to one and say "That ticket is a winner." I know that your predictions are always 100% accurate, so I buy the ticket.

Here's the important part.
Your prediction is "That ticket is a winner." Your prediction is not "Beleth will buy that ticket." You can't claim "Beleth will buy that ticket" is a prediction, because you have interfered with my decision-making process.

Even if you say to the clerk "Beleth will buy that ticket" while I'm out of earshot getting a Big Gulp, and then tell me "that ticket is a winner" when I get back to the counter, "Beleth will buy that ticket" is still not a prediction because you have interfered with the subject of that declaration (me). But "that ticket is a winner" is still a prediction because you have not interfered with the subject of that declaration (the ticket).

Under what circumstance is "Beleth will buy that ticket" a prediction? In the case where you don't tell me "that ticket is a winner."

No interfering with subject of declaration = prediction.
Interfering with subject of declaration = control.

If I’m telling you what’s going to happen, and it does, then I am predicting your behavior.

No
you
are
NOT.

You are CONTROLLING my behavior.
Squawk!

Either that of we are using different definitions of the term “predict”.

Predictions are not “caused by events” (although I think I understand what you are saying). Predictions are notions about future events based on past events (memories, knowledge, stored information, previous experiences)

"Notions" don't always come true. You have presented as an assumption all the way through this that these predictions are always 100% accurate, and I have accepted that. It is too late to change the definition now.

A prediction that comes true is true because the event happened. A prediction that doesn't come true, according to the assumptions we have made so far, does not exist... and is therefore not a prediction!

 

[muscleman]

ATHEISTS ARGUMENT R ABOUT TO GET ANNIHILATED..

Do you consider that fair? I am granting that both the car and the driver get wrecked. I am granting that that is How Things Are. But do you consider that fair, or just, that the car gets damaged because of something the driver does?

You and I live in Planet earth. We abide by the rules in Planet earth. When the car and the driver gets wrecked, BOTH SUFFER THE CONSEQUENCES.. You may think its not fair, maybe because your an ALIEN and who lives outside of our nature, BUT I AM NOT AN ALIEN..

The driver suffers, but may recover, but the car being totally wrecked may not b recovered..

God is the boss, we are just a servant....

Because God created the amino acids and the parents too. God is the root cause for all of this. The fingers of blame may make intermediate stops at other things, but in the end, they all point straight to God.

Ok then, LET US PUT GOD OUT OF THE PICTURE REAL QUICK. AND LETS TALK ABOUT "RESPONSIBILITY" IN YOUR OWN WAY OF THINKING...

You are saying that God made us all puppets, so that we are blameless for our transgressions. We suffer for them, the way the car suffers when we wreck it, but it's not our fault.


The atheist view is that there was no God to make us all puppets to begin with, so there is nobody to blame for our transgressions but ourselves.

NO NO NO... You just stated that WHOEVER IS RESPONSIBLE IS THE ONE TO BE BLAIMED, NOT US BECAUSE IT IS NOT OUR FAULT (SEE YOUR OWN TYPING ABOVE.).

NOW LETS PUT GOD OUT OF THE PICTURE REAL QUICK AND TALK ABOUT YOUR "VIEW" OF RESPONSIBILITY..

WE EXIST, LETS JUST SAY YOU ARE EVIL. NOW, SOMETHING IS RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR EXISTENCE, WHATEVER IT MAYBE (AGAIN PUT GOD OUT OF THE PICTURE FOR THE SAKE OF THE ARGUMENT.)

WHOEVER THIS "SOMETHING" BEING RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR EXISTENCE IS THE ONE RESPONSIBLE FOR "EVIL" BECAUSE YOU EXIST AND YOU ARE EVIL, THEREFORE YOU ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR BEING EVIL, THE CAUSE IS, THE ONE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOU BEING EVIL IS THE ONE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR EXISTENCE (THE CAUSE), WHATEVER IT MAY BE..

IT MAYBE "AMINO ACIDS", OR "ATOMS", WHATEVER IT IS, IT IS THE ONE RESPONSIBLE...NOT YOU (AGAIN SEE YOUR OWN TYPING ABOVE..).

NOW THERE IS NO REASON WHY WE SHOULD PUNISH EVIL MAN FOR KILLING ANYONE, BECAUSE AFTER ALL, ACCORDING TO YOUR OWN WORDS, THEY ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR ACT, THE ONE WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR ACT IS THE ONE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR EXISTENCE..

EVEN IF YOU DONT KN0W WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR EXISTENCE. YOU STILL HAVE NO REASON TO PUNISH THEM BECAUSE ACCORDING TO YOU, ITS NOT THEIR FAULT (SEE YOUR OWN TYPING ABOVE...)


YOU CANT JUST PUT ANYONE TO PRISON UNLESS YOU KNOW THEY ARE THE ONE RESPONSIBLE.. THAT IS HOW THE SYSTEM WORKS, BECAUSE I AM A HUMAN BEING, I AM NOT AN ALIEN ( ARE YOU?.)

SO AGAIN, BY YOUR OWN WAY OF THINKING, THE WORD "RESPONSIBILITY' SHOULD BE REMOVED IN THE DICTIONARY BECAUSE IT DONT EXIST....

SO THE CONCLUSION IS, RESPONSIBILITY IS A MYTH TO HUMANS, AND FREEWILL (OWN ACCORD) IS A MYTH TO HUMANS AS WELL, THATS HOW ATHEISTS THINK (AND YOURE OWN WORDS PROVES IT...)


THATS WHY I CALL ATHEISTS "LITTLE CHILDREN", BECAUSE THEY TALK, BUT DONOT THINK....

You wish we were children.

Children would sit around attentively at your knee, with eyes wide open in wonder, listening to your nonsense and believing it without question.

But we are not like that, are we? We are adults, who can think for ourselves, and realize when we're being handed a line by someone who doesn't himself even believe the load he is spewing. And it's driving you nuts.

TRUST ME, I HAVE ANNIHILATED ATHEISTS ARGUMENT PRESENTED TO ME.. TO ME, THEY ARE LITTLE CHILDREN....

 

[Akots]

Is it true that some non-english language keyboards don't have caps-lock keys at all? Are there default settings in non-english web-browsers for that kind of thing?

 

[c4ts]

Wow. I never thought about it that way before.

This led me then to think this:

Justice is good, right?
Hell is full of evil souls being justly punished.
Therefore...
What's going on in Hell is good.
And the existence of Hell is therefore also good. It's good to have a place where the punishment half of justice is carried out.

Likewise, Heaven is good. It's good to have a place where the reward half of justice is carried out.

So both Heaven and Hell are good places.

But, according to MM, you can't have good without evil.
So where's the evil? Only Earth?

I thought the idea of Hell was that it was unjust in the first place. Justice is equilibrium of exchange. If something bad happens to you, justice is something equally good happening to you. For example, if somebody steals something of yours, justice is getting back what was taken from you. Also, if you obtain something from someone else, justice is the loss of that object or something else of equal value. Concerning eternal torment, the only way to justify it would be eternal crime, which is impossible to commit during eternal torment. The crimes you commit on Earth aren't your crimes until you commit them, and therefore they are not eternal. Otherwise you would have to do injustice before actually doing something unjust, or commit it perpetually which is absurd since you could not commit crimes during eternal punishment. The usual religious counter would be "original sin," but original sin is recieving what is infinitely bad without obtaining what is infinitely good first, and that would result in infinite injustice. Also, since sin is the result of volition, you can't pass on an act of volition genetically. Zeus may punish you for the hubris of your grandparents, that's really Zeus punishing your grandparents indirectly. God, apparently, prefers to torture innocents.

 

[muscleman]

THE TOPIC IS CLOSING IN, AND AHEISTS ARE ABOUT TO LOOSE THE ARGUMENT

Now beleth, to close in the argument..
You told me that since God is responsible for "Evil", therefore he should pay for the consequences, NOT US BECAUSE WE ARE INNOCENT.. You said it, SEE YOUR TYPING ABOVE...


Now, if this is how u look at "responsibility", lets just take God out of the picture and use that form of "responsibility and apply it without God (for the sake of the argument.)"...

Your telling me that all criminials, killers, etc. should be free because it is not their fault, because the one responsible for their "EVIL ACT" is the one responsible for their existence..


Who is responsible for their evil existence? Amino acids? Earthquake? Quantum the invisible phsyics?

Yoou dont know? Even if you dont know. according to you it is not their fault, so regardless if whether you know or not, since it is not their fault, then they should be free AS THAT IS HOW YOU DEFINE "RESPONSIBILITY"....

Now you said that "If God dont exist, then I will hold responsible for my actions"..

NOW YOUR TELLING ME THAT IF YOU KNOW WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR EXISTENCE, THEN YOU ARE NO LONGER RESPONSIBLE, BUT THE ONE YOU KNOW WHO IS RESPONSIBLE, BUT IF YOU DONT KNOW WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR EXISTENCE, THEN YOU WILL TAKE RESPONSIBILITY..

Now this is where you are proven wrong..

Because now your telling me that if the police see a dead man with 40 bullets on his body and they cant find the suspect, but because they cant find a suspect (RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS DEATH). Then you should just blaim the dead corpse, and say "IT IS SUICIDE, HE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS OWN DEATH, BECAUSE WE CANNOT FIND THE SUSPECT"..

Your now trying to tell me that if you know WHO THE CAUSE IS, THEN BLAIM THE CAUSE, BUT IF YOU DONT KNOW WHO THE CAUSE IS (BUT THERE IS ALWAYS A CAUSE, WHETHER IT IS GOD OR ATOMS) THEN YOU SHOULD IGNORE THE FACT OF THE EXISTENCE OF THE CAUSE, THEN TAKE RESPONSIBILITY...

YOUR WAY OF THINKING IS VERY STUPID...

YOU BLAIM A KILLER (THE CAUSE) FOR SOMEONES DEATH IF YOU KNOW WHO THE KILLER IS, BUT IF U DONT KNOW WHO THE KILLER IS ( AND THE FACT IS THERE IS A KILLER FOR THE 40 GUN SHOTS TO THE DEAD MAN, THE CAUSE), THEN YOU BLAIM THE ONE KILLED....

IF THIS DOESNT CLARIFY HOW ATHEISTS LOST THIS ARGUMENT..

THEN U CAN BRING IT UP AGAIN CHILD...

 

[muscleman]

Now the next question atheists will ask is this...

"Infinite punishment for a finite act is not justice"..

WHAT PLANET DO U LIVE? PLANET EARTH? THE FACT HERE IS THAT WE DONT JUDGE BY "TIME", BUT WE JUDGE BY THE DEGREE OF THE CRIME...

FOR INSTANCE, IF A PERSON RAPED THE QUEEN FOR 15 MINUTES, THOUGH HIS ACT IS ONLY THAT SHORT, HE MAY SUFFER A GRIEVE CONSEQUENCES, SUCH AS BEING PUT TO JAIL FOR 40 YRS..

NOW IS THAT FAIR?

15 MINUTE ACT AND BEING PLACED TO PRISON FOR MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF MINUTES?

THIS IS HOW THE SYSTEM WORKS ON EARTH, WE JUDGE ACCORDING TO THE "DEGREE" OF CRIME, NOT BY "TIME"...

YOU SEE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 15 MINUTES AND MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF MINUTES?

I DONT KNOW ABOUT YOU, BUT I SEE THE DIFFERENCE..

JUST AS I SEE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN "FINITE" AND "INFINITY'...A FACT....

GOT IT LITTLE CHILDREN?

THIS IS HOW THE SYSTEM WORKS ON PLANET EARTH, WE ARE NOT ALIENS (ARE YOU AN ALIEN?) , WE ARE CREATED IN THE IMAGE OF GOD..

 

[Bjorn]

NO NO NO... You just stated that WHOEVER IS RESPONSIBLE IS THE ONE TO BE BLAIMED, NOT US BECAUSE IT IS NOT OUR FAULT (SEE YOUR OWN TYPING ABOVE.).

NOW LETS PUT GOD OUT OF THE PICTURE REAL QUICK AND TALK ABOUT YOUR "VIEW" OF RESPONSIBILITY..

No, no - let's stick to God, since that's who YOU are claiming is responsible. Then the rest would go like this - se your OWN typing above:

WE EXIST, LETS JUST SAY YOU ARE EVIL. NOW, God IS RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR EXISTENCE, WHATEVER IT MAYBE (LET'S keep GOD IN THE PICTURE FOR THE SAKE OF THE ARGUMENT.)

God IS THE ONE RESPONSIBLE FOR "EVIL" BECAUSE YOU EXIST AND YOU ARE EVIL, THEREFORE YOU ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR BEING EVIL, God, THE ONE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOU BEING EVIL IS THE ONE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR EXISTENCE (God)

IT IS NOT "AMINO ACIDS", OR "ATOMS", IT IS God NOT YOU (AGAIN SEE YOUR OWN TYPING ABOVE..).

NOW THERE IS NO REASON WHY WE SHOULD PUNISH EVIL MAN FOR KILLING ANYONE, BECAUSE AFTER ALL, ACCORDING TO YOUR OWN WORDS, THEY ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR ACT, God IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR ACT, God IS THE ONE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR EXISTENCE..

BECAUSE YOU KN0W WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR EXISTENCE (God) YOU STILL HAVE NO REASON TO PUNISH THEM BECAUSE ACCORDING TO YOU, ITS NOT THEIR FAULT (SEE YOUR OWN TYPING ABOVE...)

It's a slow day ....

 

[Tricky]

So... all his post are belong to you?

Yes. Yours too. I am the puppet master. Anyone who disagrees with Franko is my sock puppet.

 

[Beleth]

Re: ATHEISTS ARGUMENT R ABOUT TO GET ANNIHILATED..

You and I live in Planet earth. We abide by the rules in Planet earth. When the car and the driver gets wrecked, BOTH SUFFER THE CONSEQUENCES..

I granted you all this, sir.

You may think its not fair, maybe because your an ALIEN and who lives outside of our nature, BUT I AM NOT AN ALIEN..

I did not say I didn't think it was fair. I asked you if you thought it was fair. Do you? A simple yes or no answer will suffice.

You just stated that WHOEVER IS RESPONSIBLE IS THE ONE TO BE BLAIMED, NOT US BECAUSE IT IS NOT OUR FAULT (SEE YOUR OWN TYPING ABOVE.).

Whoever is responsible is the one to be blamed. The first part of that sentence is true. The second part is only true if we are not responsible. If we are responsible, we are to be blamed because it is our fault.

NOW LETS PUT GOD OUT OF THE PICTURE REAL QUICK AND TALK ABOUT YOUR "VIEW" OF RESPONSIBILITY..

Right. God out of the picture. Got it.

WE EXIST, LETS JUST SAY YOU ARE EVIL. NOW, SOMETHING IS RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR EXISTENCE, WHATEVER IT MAYBE (AGAIN PUT GOD OUT OF THE PICTURE FOR THE SAKE OF THE ARGUMENT.)

Okay. Something, not God, is responsible for my existence. Probably my parents. Fine. Good.

WHOEVER THIS "SOMETHING" BEING RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR EXISTENCE IS THE ONE RESPONSIBLE FOR "EVIL" BECAUSE YOU EXIST AND YOU ARE EVIL,

All right. Stop right there. I see where this train of thought's derailed now.

Just because something is responsible for my existence does not mean that that same thing is responsible for my actions. Remember, we're leaving God out of this.

Going back to where you said "LETS JUST SAY YOU ARE EVIL" for a second. What is evil about me? It has to be my actions. It could be my thoughts, but remember, we're leaving God out of this, and in the real world you and I live in, we can't read each other's thoughts. I could be thinking about vivisecting kittens and raping babies all day, but if I'm performing good acts, nobody will ever know.

So it's my actions that are evil, not my existence. And if nobody controls my actions but myself, then I alone am responsible, and to blame or be rewarded, for the evilness or goodness of my actions.

That's the conclusion you must reach if you leave God out of it.

SO AGAIN, BY YOUR OWN WAY OF THINKING, THE WORD "RESPONSIBILITY' SHOULD BE REMOVED IN THE DICTIONARY BECAUSE IT DONT EXIST....

Not really. If we're leaving God out of it, then responsibility lands squarely on my shoulders. As soon as you add God to it, you can no longer come to that conclusion.

SO THE CONCLUSION IS, RESPONSIBILITY IS A MYTH TO HUMANS, AND FREEWILL (OWN ACCORD) IS A MYTH TO HUMANS AS WELL, THATS HOW ATHEISTS THINK (AND YOURE OWN WORDS PROVES IT...)

No, your mistaking of "responsibility for existence" for "responsibility for actions" is what leads you to this erroneous conclusion.

TRUST ME, I HAVE ANNIHILATED ATHEISTS ARGUMENT PRESENTED TO ME.. TO ME, THEY ARE LITTLE CHILDREN....

I'd love to see you when you've got it going on, because you're doing a terrible job here.

I am wondering if you consider people walking away, shaking their heads, from your irrational browbeating an "annihilation." You certainly aren't convincing anyone with your current tactics, you know, and if I were you that's what I would consider the victory condition.

 

[Franko]

Beleth,

You male or female Beleth? Is it a secret?

Franko:
Either that of we are using different definitions of the term “predict”.

Predictions are not “caused by events” (although I think I understand what you are saying). Predictions are notions about future events based on past events (memories, knowledge, stored information, previous experiences)

Beleth:
"Notions" don't always come true. You have presented as an assumption all the way through this that these predictions are always 100% accurate, and I have accepted that. It is too late to change the definition now.

A prediction that comes true is true because the event happened. A prediction that doesn't come true, according to the assumptions we have made so far, does not exist... and is therefore not a prediction!

Lets say we have two computers – computer A, and computer B. A is 10x faster than B.

I load identical programs on both machines, and they share a common prefixed data file for any necessary inputs.

Now, I start the programs running on both computers simultaneously. Are you telling me that A is not reliably going to be able to predict what B will do before B does it?

Beleth:
[Lottery tickets and predictions …]You are predicting in this case. Your prediction has nothing to do with me. It only has to do with the ticket, and you are not interfering with the ticket.

Let's say we're at the 7-11 and I haven't bought a lottery ticket yet. You point to one and say "That ticket is a winner." I know that your predictions are always 100% accurate, so I buy the ticket.

Here's the important part.
Your prediction is "That ticket is a winner." Your prediction is not "Beleth will buy that ticket." You can't claim "Beleth will buy that ticket" is a prediction, because you have interfered with my decision-making process.

Right, the “interference” is the feedback part. That’s the positive or negative reinforcement re-entering the system. That is why your actions are Fated. With input (feedback) from me you will behave one way (one Destiny), and without input (feedback) from me you will act another (a different Destiny).

Even if you say to the clerk "Beleth will buy that ticket" while I'm out of earshot getting a Big Gulp, and then tell me "that ticket is a winner" when I get back to the counter, "Beleth will buy that ticket" is still not a prediction because you have interfered with the subject of that declaration (me). But "that ticket is a winner" is still a prediction because you have not interfered with the subject of that declaration (the ticket).

Exactly, we are in complete agreement. Allow me to elaborate on your example, suppose I tell the clerk "Beleth will buy that ticket" while you are out of earshot getting a Big Gulp, and the clerk (or the person behind me in line) decides to buy it instead. In that case, my feedback would have altered the outcome of the event. If I hadn’t said anything, then perhaps no one would have bought that ticket, until you bought it yourself. But because I said something, I foiled my own prediction. (unless … unless, I knew that the second ticket on the roll was the winner, and I wanted to make sure my dear Pal Beleth got that one himself. In that case I would tell the clerk that the next ticket was the winner (when it wasn’t) so he’d clear that one, and the next one would be available, in that case I would have controlled Beleth’s and the clerk’s Destiny, but neither might be aware or aware of exactly how I had altered it …)

Feedback is a positive, or negative reinforcement. You touch the hot stove when you are a kid because there is something magical and hypnotic about the color … and you get some negative feedback. You learn – don’t do that again – it becomes part of your program. The next time you see a hot stove your memory goes back to what happened the last time … and your own feedback alters your course of action (your Destiny). You don’t touch it again.

Orgasms on the other hand … that would be an example of a positive reinforcement, but I digress …

Under what circumstance is "Beleth will buy that ticket" a prediction? In the case where you don't tell me "that ticket is a winner."

No interfering with subject of declaration = prediction.
Interfering with subject of declaration = control.

Yeah, I would agree with that Beleth. Like I said, I think any disagreement between us is largely semantics.

 

[Ossai]

muscleman

The car being wrecked is just an analogy. Given the fact that this car in actuality is a person who rapes children, kills everybody, and knowing full well what they did is wrong, and can change, but chose not to change.. AND THEY EXIST. what solutions does God have for them?

Now you are trying to change the analogy, the driver or controller of the car has always been god. So let me restate your question – God causes the rape of children, kills everyone, knowing full well what god is doing is wrong and can change but chooses not to what other conclusion can be reached except that god is a malicious sadistic bastard? Because humanity cannot go against the will of god.

SO GOD CANNOT BE JUST MALICIOUS, YOU TOOK IT OUT OF CONTEXT. GOD IS ALSO GOOD BECAUSE HE CREATED GOOD MAN..

God is also evil because he created the evil man as well. If you still follow you previous opinion that god is omnipotent then humanity is nothing more than a toy and god responsible because he is controlling everything and humanity is left holding the bag.

SO DONT TAKE IT OUT OF CONTEXT AND SAY "GOD IS MALICIOUS FOR CREATING EVIL MAN.." SAY ALSO "GOD IS GOOD FOR CREATING GOOD MAN"... OK KID'?

So which is it? Is god good because he plays with his toys in a nice manner or is god evil because he destroys his toys?

THAT THE ONLY THING HERE THAT CONTRADICTS IS YOUR WAY OF "JUSTICE" AND MINE. YOU BELIEVE GOD IS EVIL FOR SENDING EVIL MAN TO HELL WHERE THEY BELONG, WHILE I BELIEVE EVIL MAN BELONG THERE... THATS THE ONLY THING THAT CONTRADICTS, YOUR AN ATHEISTS, AND IM NOT.

But god deliberately created the man to be evil. The man did not have a choice. Now is the man to blame for how he was created or is god?

YOU MAY SAY "ITS PHYSICS THAT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR HUMAN LIFE".. OR "ITS AMINO ACIDS", OR "ITS DNA"... Regardless of what or who is responsible for your existence, ACCORDING TO YOU, THAT SHOULD BE THE ONE TO PAY FOR YOUR OWN ACTIONS, NOT YOU, BECAUSE YOUR BASICALLY JUST A PRODUCT OF IT..

Again you have deliberately misrepresented the points. I have said I believe in ultimate personal responsibility, everything else is wishful thinking.

EVEN IF U DONT KNOW OR FIND THE ONE RESPONSIBLE, THAT IS STILL NO REASON TO PUNISH YOU BECAUSE AFTER ALL, YO8U ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR OWN ACTION, THE SOURCE IS, THE CAUSE IS.. JUST AS IF YOU DONT KNOW WHO KILLED SOMEONE, YOUR NOT JUST GOING TO ARREST ANYBODY.. THERE MIGHT NOT BE JUSTICE AT ALL UNTIL U FIND THE REAL CRIMINAL (BUT OF COURSE THIS IS JUST A HUMAN ANALOGY, YOUR AN ALIEN, AND THE WAY U THINK OF RESPONSIBILITY IS DIFFERENT THAN THAT OF HERE ON EARTH)...

WELL?

You are becoming very upset merely because I’m carrying your position to it’s logical conclusion. Apparently you have not understood anything you have posted nor any replies. I’m coming to the conclusion that you not only don’t deserve the company of civilized people but that you should be placed in a home so that you don’t inadvertently hurt yourself or others.

The driver suffers, but may recover, but the car being totally wrecked may not b recovered..

God is the boss, we are just a servant....

Or to paraphrase muscleman, ‘no it’s not fair but if I question then I’ll be punished.’

WE EXIST, LETS JUST SAY YOU ARE EVIL. NOW, SOMETHING IS RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR EXISTENCE, WHATEVER IT MAYBE (AGAIN PUT GOD OUT OF THE PICTURE FOR THE SAKE OF THE ARGUMENT.)

You have erected another straw man. You continue to say that god created the world and controls it. As with Franko even if god(ess) didn’t create the world but completely controls it then god(ess) is the one responsible because humanity cannot go against the will of god(ess).

TRUST ME, I HAVE ANNIHILATED ATHEISTS ARGUMENT PRESENTED TO ME.. TO ME, THEY ARE LITTLE CHILDREN.

Could you point some out? I know with certainty that that statement is not true for this board. The only argument you have cast doubt onto is whether or not you are a sock puppet.

NOW YOUR TELLING ME THAT IF YOU KNOW WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR EXISTENCE, THEN YOU ARE NO LONGER RESPONSIBLE, BUT THE ONE YOU KNOW WHO IS RESPONSIBLE, BUT IF YOU DONT KNOW WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR EXISTENCE, THEN YOU WILL TAKE RESPONSIBILITY..

False dilemma and slippery slope I believe, and continuing with a dash of an appeal to motive, correct me if I’m wrong. He is also using atoms (TLOP) as a replacement for the concept of god without being honest enough to admit it.

WHAT PLANET DO U LIVE? PLANET EARTH? THE FACT HERE IS THAT WE DONT JUDGE BY "TIME", BUT WE JUDGE BY THE DEGREE OF THE CRIME...

Let’s try to catch him with the catholic angle.
What happens when an innocent dies? Heaven or Hell?
What happens when a good person, not knowing god (accepting Jesus etc.) dies? Heaven or Hell?
What happens when an evil person, healthy for the sake of argument, honestly repents and then is accidentally killed the next day? Heaven or Hell?




Beleth
Bjorn

Ossai

 

[Beleth]

Re: THE TOPIC IS CLOSING IN, AND AHEISTS ARE ABOUT TO LOOSE THE ARGUMENT

Now beleth, to close in the argument..
You told me that since God is responsible for "Evil", therefore he should pay for the consequences, NOT US BECAUSE WE ARE INNOCENT.. You said it, SEE YOUR TYPING ABOVE...


Now, if this is how u look at "responsibility", lets just take God out of the picture and use that form of "responsibility and apply it without God (for the sake of the argument.)"...

Your telling me that all criminials, killers, etc. should be free because it is not their fault, because the one responsible for their "EVIL ACT" is the one responsible for their existence..

If God is in the picture, and God is the way you have portrayed Him, then He is controlling us like puppets. He is not only responsible for our existence, but for our actions as well. Both.

With God out of the picture, He cannot be responsible for either our existence or our actions, and the responsibility lies elsewhere. Our parents are responsible for our existence; we are responsible for our own actions.

You can't apply the logic of the with-God scenario to the without-God scenario. It just doesn't wash. It's like saying "Assume you are a woman. You can have babies. Now let's leave your womb out of this. You are saying you can have babies, but you can't! Therefore I have won this argument!"

Since the rest of your post relied on this misguided application, there is no need for me to respond further to it.

And, for the record, I am not an atheist.

 

[muscleman]

Re: Re: THE TOPIC IS CLOSING IN, AND AHEISTS ARE ABOUT TO LOOSE THE ARGUMENT

If God is in the picture, and God is the way you have portrayed Him, then He is controlling us like puppets. He is not only responsible for our existence, but for our actions as well. Both.

With God out of the picture, He cannot be responsible for either our existence or our actions, and the responsibility lies elsewhere

Your dodging an ultimate argument. Your dodging a strong infallible argument...

You are in denial (just like the rest of the cults here..)

I already mentioned it. You said the responsibility "LIES ELSEWHERE"..

And you have mentioned that if you know the one responsible, then he or it should be accountable for your action (your existence.). But if you dont know "ELSEWHERE", then your saying I DENY THE FACT THAT SOMETHING IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MY CAUSE, AND IM DELUSIONAL THAT NOTHING IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MY EXISTENCE, THAT I MAGICALLY POP INTO EXISTENCE WITHOUT ANY EXPLANATION..

Surely even science finds an explanation for our existence, if not God, then quantum physics/mechanics, amino acids, etc.

BUT REGARDLESS IF YOU KNOW THE ONE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR EXISTENCE OR NOT, YOU JUST SAID IT SHOULD BE BLAIMED, NOT YOU, BECAUSE YOUR INNOCENT..

Therefore FROM YOUR OWN WORDS, you lost this argument WITHOUT A DOUBT, BECAUSE YOUR DENYING THE CAUSE, THAT EVEN SCIENCE ITSELF ADMITS WE HAVE A CAUSE..

Do u disagree with science now?

As I was saying from the analogy, your trying to tell me that if a police find a dead body in which have 50 bullet holes in the head, and if they cant find the suspect, THEN THEY SHOULD JUST DENY THAT SOMEONE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DEATH OF THE MAN (THE CAUSE), AND SAY IT WAS SUICIDE..

You are like Scotth, it is so so obvious u lost the argument....

. Our parents are responsible for our existence; we are responsible for our own actions.

OF COURSE YUR PARENTS IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR HUMAN EXISTENCE. I KNOW THAT...

And, for the record, I am not an atheist.

IF I LOST AN ARGUMENT, ILL BE EMBRASSED TOO...AS YOU ARE...

 

[Franko]

Now this is the kind of conversation this forum was truly Destined for.

The Muscles:
WE EXIST, LETS JUST SAY YOU ARE EVIL. NOW, SOMETHING IS RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR EXISTENCE, WHATEVER IT MAYBE (AGAIN PUT GOD OUT OF THE PICTURE FOR THE SAKE OF THE ARGUMENT.)

Beleth:
Okay. Something, not God, is responsible for my existence. Probably my parents. Fine. Good.

To Beleth: Yeah, but which parents? … The ones from this Universe? Are you certain they are the original set?

To Muscles: You got some intuition my Friend.

The Muscles:
WHOEVER THIS "SOMETHING" BEING RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR EXISTENCE IS THE ONE RESPONSIBLE FOR "EVIL" BECAUSE YOU EXIST AND YOU ARE EVIL,

Beleth:
All right. Stop right there. I see where this train of thought's derailed now.

Just because something is responsible for my existence does not mean that that same thing is responsible for my actions. Remember, we're leaving God out of this.

To Muscles: I agree with you again, except for the YOU ARE EVIL part. (unless Beleth is an A-Theist and you are speaking hyperbolically.)

To Beleth: Just because something is responsible for your existence (i.e. for “creating” you) does mean EXACTLY that same thing is responsible for your Fate/Destiny (and really … this is where it gets interesting).

Here’s the thing … what if YOU are the one who created YOU? Then you and Muscle would both be right. You’d be responsible for your actions, but they would be preordained to occur (by you in the past), and God would preside over this Universe to judge whether you were created “Good” or “Evil”.

Remember, we're leaving God out of this

Right, it is a moot point if you created yourself, or some other entity created you – “God” or non-god. If the “God” that presides over this Universe – if the God that generates this universe isn’t the entity that did, it doesn’t make any difference!! This God is going to judge you as Good or Evil by their personal standards.

… It just so happens that the vast majority of us are in complete and total agreement about these very fundamental standards of acceptable behavior. It’s only the tiny minority of lunatics that are Truly Evil, and the system is designed to reduce their numbers over Time.

Beleth:
Going back to where you said "LETS JUST SAY YOU ARE EVIL" for a second. What is evil about me? It has to be my actions. It could be my thoughts, but remember, we're leaving God out of this, and in the real world you and I live in, we can't read each other's thoughts. I could be thinking about vivisecting kittens and raping babies all day, but if I'm performing good acts, nobody will ever know.

That’s exactly correct. Actions speak louder than Words. Action is the deed, it is an expression of thought (output of MPB). Word is the Symbol, it’s the idea, the concept of the action. I don’t know what you know about programming, but WORD is like the keyword (commands) of a program, and ACTION is when the line of code (the commands) are actually executed (run – generate output).

Beleth:
So it's my actions that are evil, not my existence. And if nobody controls my actions but myself, then I alone am responsible, and to blame or be rewarded, for the evilness or goodness of my actions.

That's the conclusion you must reach if you leave God out of it.

Your ACTIONS are the expressions of the inherent Evil in your Soul (assuming you are Evil (You’re a Christian Deist – aren’t you Beleth? (or is it Agnostic?))), Actions are the output of your algorithm (your conscious algorithm) but it is your algorithm itself that is flawed if your are Evil. Your algorithm is Evil, so you tend to generate “Evil-outputs” (Evil/Bad/Harmful/Negative Outputs).

The Muscles:
SO AGAIN, BY YOUR OWN WAY OF THINKING, THE WORD "RESPONSIBILITY' SHOULD BE REMOVED IN THE DICTIONARY BECAUSE IT DONT EXIST....

Beleth:
Not really. If we're leaving God out of it, then responsibility lands squarely on my shoulders. As soon as you add God to it, you can no longer come to that conclusion.

To Beleth: Why can’t you? Look, think of it this way … You are a rat, this Universe is God’s Maze. Now you may not be smart enough to realize exactly what is going on from your rat POV, and you may not even understand the criteria for the judging, but God is still Omnipotent (all powerful by comparison to you). God is still controlling you by placing you it that maze. If you meet God’s standards and you make it through the Maze, you get bumped up to a much nicer Maze with only the friendly happy rats.

And if you fail the test or you bite God’s hand or something like that, then She picks your worthless ass up by the tail, and She tosses you right back to that cesspool where She found you and all the other little rats in the first place. (It’s the place She crawled out of herself before She built the maze and starting catching rats.)

The Muscles:
SO THE CONCLUSION IS, RESPONSIBILITY IS A MYTH TO HUMANS, AND FREEWILL (OWN ACCORD) IS A MYTH TO HUMANS AS WELL, THATS HOW ATHEISTS THINK (AND YOURE OWN WORDS PROVES IT...)

Beleth:
No, your mistaking of "responsibility for existence" for "responsibility for actions" is what leads you to this erroneous conclusion.

No Beleth, the Muscles has you on this one. Whatever created your core program is ultimately responsible for your Fate. If God simply generates this Universe but did not create your program herself, then you are the one who is mistaken. God would totally control you while you exist in Her Universe, but She would not control your Ultimate Destiny – your creator would have – long ago.

The Muscles:
TRUST ME, I HAVE ANNIHILATED ATHEISTS ARGUMENT PRESENTED TO ME.. TO ME, THEY ARE LITTLE CHILDREN....

Beleth:
I'd love to see you when you've got it going on, because you're doing a terrible job here.

Ohh, my God Beleth! Are you fricking blind? I don’t exactly see a lot of resistant from the A-Theists against the Muscleman – at least not much resistance in the way of Logical Argument.

But the A-Theists are winning the Who looks the Most like a bunch of Religious Fanatics award hands down.

I am wondering if you consider people walking away, shaking their heads, from your irrational browbeating an "annihilation." You certainly aren't convincing anyone with your current tactics, you know, and if I were you that's what I would consider the victory condition.

Tactics … you have to learn those through feedback too. But consider the nitwit horde of A-Theists the Muscles up against, He still looks the more chivalrous one to me.

I think your assessment is all wrong. I’ve already become a Fan of the muscleman. I find him very intuitive, I like his examples, he speaks plainly and clearly, he isn’t afraid to tell you what he believes, and he’s honest and consistent about his beliefs.

He’s a good guy in my book.

 

[scotth]

Re: Re: Re: THE TOPIC IS CLOSING IN, AND AHEISTS ARE ABOUT TO LOOSE THE ARGUMENT

Your dodging an ultimate argument. Your dodging a strong infallible argument...

Quite the opposite. The arguement was tackled head on and show to be without logical merit

You are in denial (just like the rest of the cults here..)

I already mentioned it. You said the responsibility "LIES ELSEWHERE"..

It has been mentioned but far from proven.

And you have mentioned that if you know the one responsible, then he or it should be accountable for your action (your existence.). But if you dont know "ELSEWHERE", then your saying I DENY THE FACT THAT SOMETHING IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MY CAUSE, AND IM DELUSIONAL THAT NOTHING IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MY EXISTENCE, THAT I MAGICALLY POP INTO EXISTENCE WITHOUT ANY EXPLANATION..

While these are mostly english words, the meaning is fairly indecipherable to me. Please read your own ramblings here and see if you can phrase it coherently. I think you are trying to equate action with existence. That doesn't work. I won't deny you are delusional, but what the hell does "AND IM DELUSIONAL THAT NOTHING IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MY EXISTENCE" mean?

Surely even science finds an explanation for our existence, if not God, then quantum physics/mechanics, amino acids, etc.

Do you mean why we exist? If so, then no... science does not address this.

BUT REGARDLESS IF YOU KNOW THE ONE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR EXISTENCE OR NOT, YOU JUST SAID IT SHOULD BE BLAIMED, NOT YOU, BECAUSE YOUR INNOCENT..

There were two seperate scenarios (at least) discussed. You are confusing the arguments.

Therefore FROM YOUR OWN WORDS, you lost this argument WITHOUT A DOUBT, BECAUSE YOUR DENYING THE CAUSE, THAT EVEN SCIENCE ITSELF ADMITS WE HAVE A CAUSE..

This doesn't logically follow from anything said before.

Do u disagree with science now?

No, but I appearently disagree with what you think science has to say.

As I was saying from the analogy, your trying to tell me that if a police find a dead body in which have 50 bullet holes in the head, and if they cant find the suspect, THEN THEY SHOULD JUST DENY THAT SOMEONE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DEATH OF THE MAN (THE CAUSE), AND SAY IT WAS SUICIDE..

Nobody was trying to tell you this, imply this, or otherwise. Besides, it is irrevelent to anything said so far.

You are like Scotth, it is so so obvious u lost the argument....

I am glad you think so.

OF COURSE YUR PARENTS IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR HUMAN EXISTENCE. I KNOW THAT...

Well, it is nice that are at least a little bit in touch with reality. But, what does it add to your case?

IF I LOST AN ARGUMENT, ILL BE EMBRASSED TOO...AS YOU ARE...

You should be embarassed as soon as you hit the submit button. Your arguements make so little sense they are almost impossible to argue with. It is like arguing with someone that does not share a common language.

 

[scotth]

I have thought of a way for you (MuscleMan) to give me pause in the debate over God's existance.

Print the entire contents of this thread. Take it your local mental health organization. Hand them the copy. Identify yourself as the author your contributions to this thread. Make sure they understand that you stand behind all your statements.

If they give you a clean bill of mental health, I will ready to consider not only that there might be a God. Furthermore, I would be willing to consider that he is looking out for you specifically.

 

[Beleth]

Beleth,

You male or female Beleth? Is it a secret?

I thought you liked me for my mind!

(Since I'm married, it's irrelevant. Actually, it's irrelevant whether I'm married or not.)

Beleth spake:
A prediction that comes true is true because the event happened. A prediction that doesn't come true, according to the assumptions we have made so far, does not exist... and is therefore not a prediction!

Lets say we have two computers – computer A, and computer B. A is 10x faster than B.

I load identical programs on both machines, and they share a common prefixed data file for any necessary inputs.

Now, I start the programs running on both computers simultaneously. Are you telling me that A is not reliably going to be able to predict what B will do before B does it?

No, I am not telling you that.

1) A is not interfering with B.
2) Everything A says B will say, B will say.

Therefore, A is predicting what B will say.

Right, the “interference” is the feedback part. That’s the positive or negative reinforcement re-entering the system. That is why your actions are Fated. With input (feedback) from me you will behave one way (one Destiny), and without input (feedback) from me you will act another (a different Destiny).

This is semantics, so I am willing to grant you this and let it drop.

Allow me to elaborate on your example, suppose I tell the clerk "Beleth will buy that ticket" while you are out of earshot getting a Big Gulp, and the clerk (or the person behind me in line) decides to buy it instead.

But this violates the assumption that your predictions are 100% accurate! So "Beleth will buy that ticket" is not a prediction, in the way we have defined the word; it's just an untrue statement said before there was any indication whether it were true or not.

In that case, my feedback would have altered the outcome of the event.

...and would therefore come under the category of "control" and not "prediction."

If I hadn’t said anything, then perhaps no one would have bought that ticket, until you bought it yourself. But because I said something, I foiled my own prediction. (unless … unless, I knew that the second ticket on the roll was the winner, and I wanted to make sure my dear Pal Beleth got that one himself. In that case I would tell the clerk that the next ticket was the winner (when it wasn’t) so he’d clear that one, and the next one would be available, in that case I would have controlled Beleth’s and the clerk’s Destiny, but neither might be aware or aware of exactly how I had altered it …)

Okay, now you are just playing with your own head. Knowing the second ticket is a winner is prediction; the rest of this is control. Statements said to control people (to say "that ticket is a winner" to make the clerk buy it) don't have to be true, like predictions do.

I think any disagreement between us is largely semantics.

It's like that guy in Banter who was talking about being born with no sense of smell, and people coming up to him and saying "Can you smell this? How about this? This? This? This?" I have defined terms the way they make sense to me, and you have been bouncing ideas off them to see if the definitions will crumble. But they don't, because they cover every case; either there is interference and thus control/omnipotence, or there isn't, thus prediction/omniscience. If something looks like one, but isn't, then it was the other all along.

 

[Beleth]

Re: Re: Re: THE TOPIC IS CLOSING IN, AND AHEISTS ARE ABOUT TO LOOSE THE ARGUMENT

Your dodging an ultimate argument. Your dodging a strong infallible argument...

On the contrary. I discovered the hole in the argument, and you are ignoring that I did so.

I already mentioned it. You said the responsibility "LIES ELSEWHERE"..

Please read what I wrote in context, sir.

Originally posted by Beleth
With God out of the picture, He cannot be responsible for either our existence or our actions, and the responsibility lies elsewhere. Our parents are responsible for our existence; we are responsible for our own actions.

The responsibility lies elsewhere besides God if God is out of the picture. The responsibilty for our individual actions lies with us individually if God is out of the picture.

That is what I said. That is what I have always said.

And you have mentioned that if you know the one responsible, then he or it should be accountable for your action (your existence.).

There you go again, equating actions with existence.

My actions != my existence.

The being responsible for my actions is not necessarily the being responsible for my existence. This is especially true if we take God out of the picture.

If your version of God is correct:
- God is responsible for my existence
- God is responsible for my actions

If God is taken out of the picture:
- My parents are responsible for my existence
- I am responsible for my actions

I probably should have put it that simply earlier. It worked wonders when I was arguing with Franko.

But if you dont know "ELSEWHERE", then your saying I DENY THE FACT THAT SOMETHING IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MY CAUSE, AND IM DELUSIONAL THAT NOTHING IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MY EXISTENCE, THAT I MAGICALLY POP INTO EXISTENCE WITHOUT ANY EXPLANATION..

But I do know "elsewhere," so the rest of your paragraph means nothing.

Surely even science finds an explanation for our existence, if not God, then quantum physics/mechanics, amino acids, etc.

BUT REGARDLESS IF YOU KNOW THE ONE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR EXISTENCE OR NOT, YOU JUST SAID IT SHOULD BE BLAIMED, NOT YOU, BECAUSE YOUR INNOCENT..

Blamed for my existence? Hardly! They should be congratulated for my existence!

Blamed for my actions? Only if your version of God is in the picture. If God is not in the picture, then I, and I alone, can be blamed or congratulated for my actions.

As I was saying from the analogy, your trying to tell me that if a police find a dead body in which have 50 bullet holes in the head, and if they cant find the suspect, THEN THEY SHOULD JUST DENY THAT SOMEONE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DEATH OF THE MAN (THE CAUSE), AND SAY IT WAS SUICIDE..

Only if your version of God is in the picture. If your God makes us all puppets, then He, and only He, is to blame. With God out of the picture, the murderer, and only the murderer, is to blame.

You are like Scotth, it is so so obvious u lost the argument....

You have gotten the with-God and without-God cases so badly muddled in your own mind that you don't realize that you have disproved your own case. Fortunately, there are clearer-headed individuals reading this that are trying to set you straight.


Oh yeah, and you didn't answer my "Do you think this is fair?" question either.

IF I LOST AN ARGUMENT, ILL BE EMBRASSED TOO...

Excellent! Will you be leaving now?

 

[Beleth]

To Beleth: Yeah, but which parents? … The ones from this Universe? Are you certain they are the original set?

To Muscles: You got some intuition my Friend.

Given a few more days of this, Franko, I will be able to tell you, within the span of about ten minutes, exactly when your meds wear off.