Barnard17

Strawman argument. You assume God to be true, ergo love can be true. People who do not believe in God are still able to believe and consider love, it just doesn't conform to your perception of it.

Where have I constructed a Grand Narrative in the slightest?

She invoked Pascal's Wager as a reason to read the Bible and consider it as a theologically truthful work. My point was that with all the other Grand Narrative religions claiming a monopoly on the truth to really work Pascal's Wager you have to do a LOT of reading and get in the pockets of a stupendous amount of Gods. Otherwise you're hedging your bets on one horse when there's fifty others running all with equally good odds. How is your response AT ALL relevant to what I said?

Yes, pretty much as explained in the second half of the sentence after the section you put in bold.

If we ignore the whole "'Communist' Regimes=/=Communism" argument, considerate of the fact that any Totalitarian Government has always been about the will of their supreme leader more than any relevance it keeps to the ideological views they purport in an attempt to gain popular support. Surely the fact that Marx and Engel's writings have been so heavily influential make them important texts to study when you take on board immediate global history and ongoing international politics, such as Cuba and China? By no means are they the inconsequential triflings that Jesse seems to imply.

__________________

JesseB5446

No. I have'nt and I don't speak like I have and that was my point. That was a reply directed at Lucifer Sam saying "no where in the Bible are the pearly gates mentioned", when they clearly are. So has he studied it and is just lying or referencing something that he's not studied or maybe remembered it incorrectly? IDK, but in any case, it was wrong.

I'll give you an example. Neopolitan used the word she when speaking about me. Then in you did the same thing. Then sleepy jack followed. If Neopolitan had'nt drawn their own conclusion without research, neither you nor sleepy jack would have been ill informed to believe that I am female. Just a guess, but maybe Lucifer Sam heard someone spout that nugget of worthless information and decided that it was either true or sounded true enough to misinform others by repeating it. News travels fast. Bullsh!t travels faster. BTW, I'm a dude.


What? You gonna give me sh!t for 1 letter?

Amen, brother. I agree wholeheartedly and if you would have actually read what I said instead of chomping at the bit for your chance to rip into a believer, than you would have caught the "because there is no proof" section. I was speaking to those saying "seeing is believing".


Calm down, cupcake. Sounds like you could use some God in your life or Buddha or Tantra or a joint or something. I love you, man.

Barnard17

No, you were replying to Lucifer Sam for saying that and Right Track for saying people who take the Bible literally should be beaten (paraphrasing). Your reply: "I'd be wiiling to bet that the majority of the non-believers in this forum have not read a Bible since the last time they fell asleep in church Easter Sunday umpteen years ago. How does one base his faith on a subject he's never studied? I'm not talking about reading it to pull out all the arguable pieces, but really studied it. We are talking about your eternal soul, maybe, right?"

You challenged Pascal's Wager. Rather than simply saying "if you haven't read it properly, don't make claims about it" you instead brought up the Wager which is a whole other kettle of fish. "How does one base his faith on a subject he's never studied?" - have you studied all religious texts? How can you find a grounding for your faith, upon your own stipulations, if you haven't REALLY researched the other religions to ensure they're truly bunk?

If you didn't mean to raise Pascal's Wager you should've phrased it better.

Yah, but you've got a girls name.

You'll have to excuse me. It appears you don't grasp the English language in the same fashion that I do. Maybe look up "non sequitur"? The point I was making was that "seeing is believing" (or more to the point seeking some form of valid empirical evidence) is valid to use regarding the existence of God due to it's nature as a described entity with actions taken. Love is completely separate, it's a human emotion. Plenty of people don't believe it and everyone's understanding of the word is different. So, your example is irrelevant.

__________________

Neapolitan

Jesse,

Dude, my bad, I am easily confussed often, and I must apologize for following the crowd and for using the wrong pronoun. I knew Jesse was a guy's name, taking the fact that "Jesse" is the father of "David," and that 80's song "I Wish I Had Jessie's Girl" so I initially thought you were a male, but I saw some one else use "she." I didn't mean to offend you by mistaking your gender. Hey it happens to other posters too, it seems that many people thought Boo was a female because of his avatar.

And I'm sorry for not putting in the R&D and not finding out, it would really help if somewhere there was a gender thingy near the avatar. I've seen it at other forums its odd this one doesn't have it.

__________________

FETCHER.

It's an easy mistake to make, most people on here have had their gender mixed up, plus, where I stay I know 2 girls called Jesse, It's like the name Ashley, it can be used for male or female, I wouldn't worry about it .

__________________

My Journal.
Last.Fm if your interested...

dark shadow

Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.
So no, an atheist CAN'T prove to you there is no God.
However, that is not proof that there is a God.
I can tell you I know someone who is 24 feet tall and lives on the moon, and you can't prove me wrong. You know I'm lying, but you can't prove it.

Neapolitan

How would you know this person, did you visit him on the moon? Probably not, there is like a 99.99% chance you didn't go to the moon. The odds are a llittle bit better that the man on the moon visited you, given the fact to live on the moon would require more technology then it does to live on Earth. Just say it's a 50/50 chance, because he either did or didn't. If your 24 feet tall friend came to Earth and said he live on the moon, I highly doubt that happened. But if it did happened where you visited by MIB? Because you reveal the fact that you know a 24' person on the moon, is there any repercussion for divulging such informantion?

__________________

Malicious Wakizashi

Nice consistency of logic. There's a high chance you didn't go to the moon, but there's a greater chance that someone living on the moon in a colony, which correct me if I'm wrong does not exist, used their advanced technology to come here?

__________________
.
..a love sour

...
..a diesel supreme

http://soundcloud.com/stoondtje-jupiter


http://soundcloud.com/couldnthaveaparadesoimad

Bane of your existence

Unhumorous person is unhumorous.