All christians, please try and answer this.

[Maddoc]

I'm defending people's beliefs. Your "reason" is absurdity to them, which is fine, because you obviously find ME absurd, which I won't question, because I don't believe science is the answer to this universe crap, and you do. Oh, by the way, reason isn't defined to specific parameters; reason is like common sense, if you grow up in a good place, you'll have good, polite common sense, while if you grow up in a murder infested slug-hole, your common sense differs from the other person. Reason differs from person to person. Your not trying to convert people to "common reason", your trying to convert people to "scientism". And there is a difference between the two.

[Paroxysm]

I'm defending people's beliefs. Your "reason" is absurdity to them, which is fine, because you obviously find ME absurd, which I won't question, because I don't believe science is the answer to this universe crap, and you do. Oh, by the way, reason isn't defined to specific parameters; reason is like common sense, if you grow up in a good place, you'll have good, polite common sense, while if you grow up in a murder infested slug-hole, your common sense differs from the other person. Reason differs from person to person. Your not trying to convert people to "common reason", your trying to convert people to "scientism". And there is a difference between the two.

1. People should be able to defend their own beliefs, they shouldn't need some 12 year old on the internet to defending them.

2. You're building up a straw-man argument and knocking it down, learn how to debate.

3. I've never said "science is the answer to the universe" that's a complete non-sequitur.

4. Once again you're conflating definitions, reason and subjective paradigms are different. Reason is the culmination of philosophical inquiry, constantly being tested and reevaluated.

Your not trying to convert people to "common reason", your trying to convert people to "scientism". And there is a difference between the two.

Science is based on reason, evidence and inquiry. Religions are based on dogma, arrogance and unquestionable propriety. Science is an extremely effective means by which we discern true and false claims, and there is no reason why religious claims shouldn't be judged for efficacy. Science has advanced the human race further in the 500 hundred years that the scientific method has been around than religions have done in the past 5 thousand years. My goals aren't to destroy religion, nor to mock the credulous, I want to understand the truth. Whatever the truth may be, whether I like it or not, it is, and I chose to base my life and my understanding on truth instead of hear-say, anecdote and comfortable fantasy. I don't fear the truth, If a God can be proven to exist, I will believe that a God exists but until evidence is provided, I remain unconvinced. I don't claim to know the truth, I only claim to seek it and ultimately that's what makes all the difference.

“The truth, of course, is that a billion falsehoods told a billion times by a billion people are still false.”
~Travis Walton

You seem to think that science sucks the beauty out of life and you haven't the slightest clue how flawed that is. Seeking to understand the workings of the universe only magnify it's brilliance.

"Science has explained nothing; the more we know the more fantastic the world becomes and the profounder the surrounding darkness."
~Aldous Huxley

[[MPGH]arunforce]

Serious thread is serious.

Remember, Jesus hates you. Allah FTW.

[Empire]

Serious thread is serious.

Remember, Jesus hates you. Allah FTW.

/done

anyway, you change your avi? who the fuck is that?

[Maddoc]

The "arrogance" which you believe religion is based on isn't arrogance, it's called "belief". Belief in something greater than us that can't posssibly understood, just known. Science isn't based on reason dude. It's based solely on evidence, inguiry, perfectionalism and arrogance. Science and those who study it are too arrogant to just understand what most know as the truth: that there is a god. Science has made TECHNOLOGICAL advances, yes, but religion doesn't need technology, only belief, and the will to push through hardships (or just make a fire, rather than use a lighter and burn down a forest). And I guess you could say scientists are the most lazy people out there; they make machines to do stuff for them, rather than do it theirselfs. If reason is being re-evaluated constantly, that means reason IS subject to the persons feeelings. And I don't think science sucks the beauty out of life, I think it makes life easier, but easier isn't always good. I also think science can enhance the beauty of life.

And yes, I'm twelve, absolutely. You figured me out....
/not

/me

[Paroxysm]

The "arrogance" which you believe religion is based on isn't arrogance, it's called "belief". Belief in something greater than us that can't posssibly understood, just known. Science isn't based on reason dude. It's based solely on evidence, inguiry, perfectionalism and arrogance. Science and those who study it are too arrogant to just understand what most know as the truth: that there is a god. Science has made TECHNOLOGICAL advances, yes, but religion doesn't need technology, only belief, and the will to push through hardships (or just make a fire, rather than use a lighter and burn down a forest). And I guess you could say scientists are the most lazy people out there; they make machines to do stuff for them, rather than do it theirselfs. If reason is being re-evaluated constantly, that means reason IS subject to the persons feeelings. And I don't think science sucks the beauty out of life, I think it makes life easier, but easier isn't always good. I also think science can enhance the beauty of life.

And yes, I'm twelve, absolutely. You figured me out....
/not

/me

Wow, you never cease to amaze me. Just when I thought you couldn't have been more hopelessly deluded, you raise the bar once again.

[Empire]

Paroxysm is catching on. Walls of text are fucking awful to read ppl, don't do it.

[Paroxysm]

Paroxysm is catching on. Walls of text are fucking awful to read ppl, don't do it.

It feels intellectually dishonest to claim someone argument is flawed and not explain to them why. But that requires the afore mentioned walls of text, and when you're dealing with people who have the attention span of a house fly trying to fly out of a home through a closed window, it doesn't do much good.

"Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference."
~Mark Twain

[Maddoc]

Wow, you never cease to amaze me. Just when I thought you couldn't have been more hopelessly deluded, you raise the bar once again.

If you had anything to say about what I said, other than some insult meant to trigger an insult back, you should. If you have to resort to insults to keep your arguement going in (what you feel is) a strong side, just state it. Rather than trying to insult people, which just makes a laugh, state that you can't bring your arguement further. In other words, take your ego outta your ass.

[Empire]

It feels intellectually dishonest to claim someone argument is flawed and not explain to them why. But that requires the afore mentioned walls of text, and when you're dealing with people who have the attention span of a house fly trying to fly out of a home through a closed window, it doesn't do much good.

"Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference."
~Mark Twain

Meh, i usually read through about 80% of your stuff, and watch most of your vids/links. I just don't have the time though sometimes.

[Paroxysm]

If you had anything to say about what I said, other than some insult meant to trigger an insult back, you should. If you have to resort to insults to keep your arguement going in (what you feel is) a strong side, just state it. Rather than trying to insult people, which just makes a laugh, state that you can't bring your arguement further. In other words, take your ego outta your ass.

There's no ego to worry about, this is the internet, "defending your honor" on the internet is completely retarded. The issue isn't that I have nothing to say, the issue is that you spew so much god-awful ignorance that it's become a burden to correct everyone of your mistakes. I'm so amazed by how confidently you defend your own ignorance. I would encourage you to read through your posts and be damn sure you don't sound like an fool, because if we continue this debate, your only giving me more ammunition.

“When men are most sure and arrogant they are commonly most mistaken, giving views to passion without that proper deliberation which alone can secure them from the grossest absurdities”
~David Hume

[Maddoc]

Even when I've won, must you still believe you know everything? I mean seriously dude, you don't, so why bother trying to make yourself and others believe you know everything

[Paroxysm]

Even when I've won, must you still believe you know everything? I mean seriously dude, you don't, so why bother trying to make yourself and others believe you know everything

HAHAHAHA wow, you're really amazing. I've always thought people were fairly reasonable and unassuming, but after reading all your posts here, you butcher the English language, out right make shit up and still think you've won... Perhaps I should reassess the average persons intellectual honesty.

[Maddoc]

Make shit up? I haven't. Show me one thing, ONE, and I'll re-asses my arguement. But still, because of your huge ass ego, I say this:

Even a dumbass can know truth where smart-asses cannot.

I admit, I'm obviously not as smart as you on the science side of things, but I know a pile of bullshit from another when I see it, and yours just takes the cake. And my reason for knowing I've won: You don't have anything to say to mey statement some 2 or 3 posts back, you believe reason has a fixed definition, which is so WRONG, you apparently believe you are a higher being, subjecting people other than you to the term "people" as if you aren't the same and the fact that you believe that using big words and acting all high-all-mighty means your smarter than everyone. Let me inform you of something:

It doesn't.

[Illuminatus]

Ok, what I want is a straight answer from a christian.

Here is my question.

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?”

~ Epicurus, greek philosopher and destroyer of all religions.