Religion is Silly Fairy Tales

Discussion in 'Religion & Philosophy' started by Bob0627, Aug 8, 2021.

  1. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,673
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I hate to pop your huge bubble but ALL history is written AFTER the fact.
    I do not know that is a fact.
    I didnt I proved the point
    Another flase claim, in fact I did, and again you summarily dismiss and pretend evidence was never posted.
    Yet you think you proved your point.
    Oh but I can computers function logically even when a program is all ****ed up.
    That has nothing to do with the existence of JC. Nice red herring, thats all you got.
    Again I proved what you mean, the problem is you dont understand what you mean, even when its proven BS.
    WTF do you think swensson and you were arguing about for the lst 60 pages, FFS man! Now you demonstrate proof you dont even know wth you are arguing about!
    another screw up, there was no contradiction, again I proved it and you simply summarily deny everything that contradicts your politics.
    The hell it isnt! See there you go proving you dont even know the different varieties of an argument. I mean dood you are running out of feet to shoot.
    From anyone else I woujld say get serious, but sadly you actually believe that nonsense.
    I merely pointed out how dishonest the claim in the referenced post is, TFB, when someone posts a false claim and it is proven to be a false claim as I did, its not a fallacy of any kind.
     
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2021
  2. Jolly Penguin

    Jolly Penguin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2020
    Messages:
    8,224
    Likes Received:
    3,847
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes you did dodge the question, and you still are. And no, you did not prove your claim. You diverted from it. Your claim was that we choose to believe or not believe in Gods. I said I made no such choice. Just as I made no choice not to believe I am an elephant. I asked if you do make that choice.

    Thats where you dodged, talked about rubber rooms, called me a liar, etc. Anything but answering the question, proving your point that we choose to believe or not to believe, or admitting that we don't.

    This whole "'choose to believe" thing is not a claim unique to you. I see it crop up every now and then, usually pushed by adherents to Abrahamic religions. This idea that atheists choose not to believe... It makes no sense to me at all, so I tried to explore it. But you just did your chest thumping as per usual. That's unfortunate.

    What point? What did you think my point was that you think I think I proved? It is always interesting to see what you have projected onto others. My only point was that I don't choose not to believe in Gods or that I am an elephant, which was in response to your claim that we do.

    Yes it does. The existence of a guy named Yeshua who got crucified and said guy being messiah (Christ) are two very different claims. The bible is not a story of a random unremarkable joe schmo named Yeshua who got crucified along with a bunch of other random unremarkable guys. It is the story of Jesus Christ, messiah and redeemer, son of God, and all those other fairy tales.

    Yeshua could have existed and the Jesus Christ mythology could have been built around a historical human being, or it could have been a combination of them, or it could have been an imagined one.

    Nevertheless, people were crucified by the Romans, and minus the mythology it hardly matters what their names were or if any or many were named Yeshua. That's not Jesus the Christ.

    Lol ok then. You think you know what I mean I don't know what I mean? Really? That's some top end projection right there.

    I know exactly what I was saying. I am pretty sure I know exactly what Swensson was saying too. It has always been pretty evident that you don't grasp what either of us were saying.

    Demanding that people all use your preferred definition of words, and intentionally misreading others by pretending people all use your definition even when they clearly state otherwise is not an argument. It is a never ending equivocation fallacy.

    No, you are. And you are also running out of arms to pat your own back with.

    Again, I don't think you know what I believe. The vast majority of what you write to me is projection. You even just told me you know what I mean more than I do. That level of projection is downright pathological.

    Wrong. You attacked "neo-atheism" by accusing me personally of lying. That is pure ad hominem. Again, even if Hitler himself says 1 + 1 = 2, that doesn't make it wrong.

    It is also a fallacy because I never said I was "neo-atheist". Nor did you say what "neo-atheist" means to you other than to vaguely hand waive and declare it and atheism a religion.
     
  3. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,673
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    there you go continue to blame your inability to understand comprehend simple english on me.
    not surprising you dont even know what point you were trying to prove.
    and you have zero evidence this did not happen.

    On the other hand christians have excellent legitimate historical evidence it did happen, you are the one imagining not christains.

    you are the one in denial of the evidence.
    proved it lol
    you also proved it when you couldnt prove it in logic, not my problem
    not too difficult when dealing with someone who has proven beyond a shadow of doubt time and time again they do not understand simple english, nor how to reference a dictionary to figure it out.
    if thats what it takes to make you feel better. its called you do the dirty deed then accuse your opponent of what you just did, just like the jews did to the germans, but that only works for stooges and ostriches.
    I exposed a totally dishonest claim nothing more, that of course was posted without any reference quote from me so the facts could be easily falsified since no reference could be examined. I posted the reference omitted so everyone could see a falsified claim against me.
    Facts are not adhoms LOL lame!
    the shoe fits perfectly though.
    false stating a fact is not an ad hom, sorry
     
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2021
    JET3534 likes this.
  4. Jolly Penguin

    Jolly Penguin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2020
    Messages:
    8,224
    Likes Received:
    3,847
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This is especially curious.

    Koko declares that he knows what I mean better than I myself know what I mean. Odd right? He can read minds?

    Then he accuses me of poor English, and claims that this makes it easier, and not harder, for him to know what I mean to say. If I couldn't speak basic English, you would think it would be hard or maybe even impossible to grasp what I meant to say. But he says the opposite is so for him.

    This is the same person who for many pages in another thread kept intentionally misreading people by equivocating a word people used and clearly defined their use of, into a different meaning of the same word that he prefers. He thought that by doing so he was proving them wrong. And he did this with a straight face. I don't think it was mere trolling.

    I think he thinks he actually controls other people's minds through semantics?? Very odd indeed.
     
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2021
  5. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I am claiming the Bible is mostly myths and fairy tales. Sometimes myths and fairy tales are based on fact, sometimes not.

    I don't care who takes me seriously and who doesn't, I don't need to prove anything to anyone. This is strictly a discussion forum, not a science lab.

    I didn't say it's not relevant, I said it's immaterial that a god exists or not. It's relevant to those who believe in a god and especially to those who live the myth. But the belief or disbelief does not change anything about the Universe.

    It's only a religion to those who want to make it a religion, it isn't a religion by itself. People can pray to a rock but does that mean those who don't pray to a rock are part of a no rock religion? What kind of sense does that make?

    Nope, I have it 100% correct.

    This isn't a court of law and yes circumstantial evidence is enough to make some people believe that such circumstantial evidence is fact but it isn't, it's still merely circumstantial evidence unless and until proven otherwise.

    History is filled with facts and myths, one has to decide for oneself what makes sense and what doesn't.

    Nonsense, it is not a "well known fact that atheism is a religion", atheism being that one does not believe in the god myth.

    So if I labeled you delusional it has meaning but does that mean you're truly delusional just because I labeled you delusional? NDAA 2012 has a clause that says that if one is labeled an "enemy combatant", American citizen or not, one can be indefinitely detained absent all due process protections guaranteed by the Constitution. Labeling can be a dangerous thing but at the end of the day a label is still only a label.
     
    Jolly Penguin likes this.
  6. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,673
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    for the most part the grammar you post isn't poor, your comprehension of English however leaves much to be desired.
    sure that's not real hard to do when someones posts prove beyond a shadow of doubt their understanding grammar and English comprehension is defective and lacking.
    Koko's posts are specific the birds posts are trying to combine several categories into one ambiguous box, which is 'precisely' the definition of equivocation, and of course when they are busted down to their shorts it's the usual look in the mirror dishonest projection blame game, blame it all on to Koko.
    I have to laugh because you don't even know what equivocation means.
    e·quiv·o·ca·tion
    the use of ambiguous language to conceal the truth or to avoid committing oneself; prevarication.
    Thats what the bird and another member is doing in that other thread. round and round they go.
    trolling is when someone puts up this kind of nonsense semantics and demands there is a difference even after I proved there is no difference both grammatically and logically:
    Its a fact that proof is meaningless to trolls, that is after all why they are called trolls.
    Trolls cant prove their points, all they have is incessant rants and pointless rhetoric.
    Thats why I prove everything :lol: (proof not shown in the above post, see original thread to review the proofs)
    false this is all about you using semantics and pretending there's a distinction when in reality there's no difference whatsoever except in your vivid imagination.
    that's pretty vague Bob how much is mostly 1% 10% 50%, did you read it cover to cover and you know for a fact that it is 'mostly' fiction?
    well Bob it's a matter of establishing credibility I mean if you don't care if you're seen as credible out here by what you post well that's solely up to you.

    but I'll tell you a little secret if you can't defend the claims you post when it's challenged nobody's going to believe you, well except for a couple cheerleaders.
    that semantics Bob there's no difference between something being immaterial or irrelevant.
    We are not discussing the universe Bob, nice red herring.
    technically that's actually correct if you're not of the rock religion then clearly you are of some norock religion,

    however it is true people create religion, everybody's got one, if you stand by and uphold so much as one moral you have a religion my friend.
    that's 100% false Bob,

    you absolutely cannot have a religion without a belief, neither can you have a religion without acting upon that belief, no action no belief no religion.

    you first have to have a belief, that takes us as far as philosophy, then you have to act upon that belief, and that takes us to the point of a religion.

    it should be painfully clear that beliefs are a subset of religion since religion is the composite of all your (applicable) beliefs not the other way around I.e you had it bassackwards therefore 100% incorrect
    proving circumstantial evidence just remains circumstantial evidence it doesn't change the nature or character of the evidence Bob. like I said people go to the electric chair on circumstantial evidence alone.
    circumstantial evidence is a synthetic deduction.
    I suppose that depends on which circles you hang around in.
    just because you don't have a deity-based religion doesn't mean you don't have a religion Bob. it just means the source of your beliefs (ie religion) does not come from a deity but from some other source you still have a religion when it's all said and done, sorry.
    If you have so much as one moral you hold true and act upon you have a religion, regardless of the source.
    no Bob, at the end of the day the label still carries the same meaning and with that meaning carries the same actions or non-action such as being detained. labels have meanings and those meanings have attached actions as you just proved therefore it's not just a bunch of thrown together letters put on something as a decoration as you would like to purport.
     
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2021
  7. Jolly Penguin

    Jolly Penguin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2020
    Messages:
    8,224
    Likes Received:
    3,847
    Trophy Points:
    113

    There it is folks. Try to wrap your brains around the above without seeing a contradiction, and win a prize.
     
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2021
  8. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,673
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What you are incapable of wrapping your mind around is your problem and your problem alone, not ours, though you work very hard to make it everyone elses problem by posting reams of nonsense.

    I will not vote for 'I believe', and I will not vote for 'I do not believe' therefore I abstain from voting either way, therefore I am agnostic.

    Not to damn difficult.
     
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2021
  9. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Mostly defines itself if you speak English (see the first 4 letters, it indicates more than 50%). I read the Old Testament cover to cover and in vivid detail since it was central to my religious education. I was even taught the writings of "intellectuals" who provided lengthy explanations about many of the passages. I read parts of the New Testament on my own. I know for a fact it's mostly fiction just like I know for a fact Santa and the Tooth Fairy are mostly fiction. Can I prove it? No, I don't need to, it's my opinion. Do I need to prove it to anyone? Absolutely not, what the fk for?

    What you're really saying applies mostly to you. But as I posted, I don't care if I'm credible to you or anyone else.

    See above.

    Contextually, they are applied differently by moi.

    Correct but I wasn't discussing the Universe.

    That's your personal definition of religion, not mine and not the billions of people who actually follow a religion.

    See above.

    Of course it does. Once proven, circumstantial evidence morphs into supporting evidence. Theory is no longer theory once proven to be fact.

    The rest of your response revolves around your definition of religion which I don't share so there's no point.
     
    Jolly Penguin likes this.
  10. Jolly Penguin

    Jolly Penguin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2020
    Messages:
    8,224
    Likes Received:
    3,847
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Being an agnostic, atheist, or theist isn't about "voting". It is about whether you believe or not.

    And yet you claim to be agnostic. Alrighty then.
     
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2021
  11. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,673
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I forgot you are an automaton of the borg collective that has no choice what you want to believe, your belief is injected into your brain by the borg central multiplex array.

    There you have it folks remember this dodge when atheists demand proof of G/god, nothing worth while to see here.
     
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2021
  12. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If you're referring to me (I assume since you're quoting me), I've never demanded proof for the existence of any god. It's you who keeps demanding that I or any atheist prove to you that a god does not exist.
     
  13. Jolly Penguin

    Jolly Penguin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2020
    Messages:
    8,224
    Likes Received:
    3,847
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Most of us lack your amazing powers of self delusion. Most of us can't make ourselves believe that we are elephants. You are special.
     
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2021
  14. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,673
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The best you go is to fabricate a strawman, I never said that, and proved to everyone here I never said it yet you persist in acusing me of saying something I never said.

    Im not the one who foolishly claims people cant choose what to believe, magical powers of self delusion falls under your department.

    Anyone out here agree with the bird...that people are automatons and do not have the ability to choose what they believe?
    This is false Bob, you are arguing God et al is a myth and fairy tail.
     
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2021
  15. Jolly Penguin

    Jolly Penguin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2020
    Messages:
    8,224
    Likes Received:
    3,847
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's funny. I never said I was borg. You are so quick to whine about what you yourself do routinely.

    I can't choose to believe I am an elephant. You can mock me for that all you want. I still can not do it. And neither can most other human beings.

    And I never voted to not believe in God. Nor did any atheist I ever met. I have met some who would like to believe in God. They would vote to believe, but still couldn't actually believe. Throughout history many atheists pretended to believe, and would have voted to, but that doesn't mean they did believe or that they could have made themselves believe.

    Theism, atheism, and agnosticism is not about voting. Believing is not voting. For someone who endlessly criticizes me for my English comprehension, one would expect you to know that.
     
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2021
  16. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,673
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sure you can, there is nothing stopping you.
    What you believe is a choice.
    Choice is what voting is about
    When you vote you choose yes or no to each proposition.
    Everyone on the planet would agree its delusional to claim what they voted to believe is not their choice.
     
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2021
  17. Jolly Penguin

    Jolly Penguin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2020
    Messages:
    8,224
    Likes Received:
    3,847
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes there is. Are you able to do it? Remember last time I asked you this you didn't give a clear answer and decided to talk about rubber rooms and call me a liar.
     
  18. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,673
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I gave a perfectly clear answer, you didnt understand english as usual, and you blame me for your ****up usual LOL What is squirming for 100? LOL

    you made a false statement!
    That wasnt a very truthful thing to do

    falsifying what other people post is not being honest, its being dishonest.
     
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2021
  19. Jolly Penguin

    Jolly Penguin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2020
    Messages:
    8,224
    Likes Received:
    3,847
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No you didn't. Your answer was that "you" (which could have meant me or people in general) can. You didn't say "We" and you didn't say "I". You did not answer the question then, and now you again did not answer the question.

    Is it? Why are you squirming not to answer a simple question?

    And yet you do it all the time.
     
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2021
  20. The Wyrd of Gawd

    The Wyrd of Gawd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2012
    Messages:
    29,682
    Likes Received:
    3,995
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The biblical God character rejoices when he kills people.
     
  21. The Wyrd of Gawd

    The Wyrd of Gawd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2012
    Messages:
    29,682
    Likes Received:
    3,995
    Trophy Points:
    113
  22. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,673
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You were very naughty, and you double down with more of the same.

    [​IMG]
     
  23. Jolly Penguin

    Jolly Penguin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2020
    Messages:
    8,224
    Likes Received:
    3,847
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You still don't answer the question.

    You like to be cryptic, I get it.

    You are a waste of time.
     
    Dirty Rotten Imbecile likes this.
  24. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What in the world is "false" about posting that I never demanded proof for the existence of a god? If you believe I lied, please quote the post where I demanded such nonsense. Again it's YOU who keeps demanding proof that a god does not exist, this thread is littered with such posts from you, you are projecting.

    That has nothing to do with the above and it's not an argument for me, it's what I know to be true. I also acknowledge that others believe the god myth is unquestionable fact and some even live and breathe the myth. Like I said, to each his/her own as long as these beliefs do not adversely affect others (e.g. Crusades and Inquisition).
     
    RoccoR and Jolly Penguin like this.
  25. RoccoR

    RoccoR Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,155
    Likes Received:
    248
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    RE: Religion is Silly Fairy Tales
    SUBTOPICS: Mentality
    ※→ Bob0627, et al,



    (COMMENT)

    I would have thought that most people would have captured the inference that you did not ask for a reason. A "Proof of Existence for any Supernatural Entity" is, at this point in time, is impossible to produce. It is the difference between that which is real and tangible in this dimension - and that - which is something that cannot be explained by a "proof" and "reproducible" through inquiry and experimentation. In the case of the "Supreme Being" (a supernatural entity), there is no means to substantiate such an entity either in physics or metaphysics - any more than string theory can substantiate. Yet I still find colleges that speak of string theory as a pursuit of scientific study but discount the pursuits of study in the arts and crafts of religion. Neither can stand up to the rigors scientific method. But then, I find it just as unsound for (example only) that the leaders of the Abrahamic Religions believe in transubstantiation but not the Alchemist transformation.

    Probably a better-differentiated paradox is a belief in "angels and demons" that have wings and can fly and work magic (through the power of the Supreme Being), • versus •, the belief in ghosts, specters, and spirits → witches and warlocks.

    This is why it must be the case that in these contemporary times, that the world of science of the physical reality and the world of noetic study are separate and distinct (even though they might use the same tools).

    (COMMENT)

    Throughout most of the history of humanity → never really been achieved for any substantial period of time.

    OK, I'm off the soapbox.
    [​IMG]
    Most Respectfully,
    R
     
    Bob0627 and Jolly Penguin like this.

Share This Page