The Treadmill of Atheism

Finshaggy

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
What you are referring to as "Gods" are not Gods because they do not fit the formal definitions. You don't get to just pick random words and say that's what things are. What's stopping me from calling my dog a cat? It wouldn't fit the formal definition.
Click to expand...
And you are simply refusing to prove my Gods wrong by instead trying to lower them, because they aren't the magic man in the sky that YOU want.

So I am pretty sure you are still a Christian. Only Christians, Jews and Muslims think that God is all powerful, all knowing, etc. If you can't get passed that, you are one of those 3 things. Or you are starting a new religion. Because if you are defining God now, you are basically a preacher.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Finshaggy said:
By saying "God does not give us morals, and Reasoning does, so Matt won" you are showing confirmation bias.

People don't win debates by being right, they win debates by proving the other person wrong. You can't have a "Clear win" as you yourself put it, without someone actually being proven wrong.
Click to expand...
Where do you believe morals originate?

How would one prove the position of a supernatural being to be wrong? It is impossible, so what you're saying is that there can be no winners in debates where the subject can't be proven or disproven
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Finshaggy said:
And you are simply refusing to prove my Gods wrong by instead trying to lower them, because they aren't the magic man in the sky that YOU want.

So I am pretty sure you are still a Christian. Only Christians, Jews and Muslims think that God is all powerful, all knowing, etc. If you can't get passed that, you are one of those 3 things. Or you are starting a new religion. Because if you are defining God now, you are basically a preacher.
Click to expand...
You are calling your dog a cat and expecting me to go along with it because you believe it strengthens your argument

I'm insisting you call your dog a dog so we don't add confusion to the debate

So stop calling your dog a cat and lets move forward


How does using the formal definition of the actual word we're discussing make me a theist in any sense of the word if I don't believe in any gods?
 
Finshaggy

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
You are calling your dog a cat and expecting me to go along with it because you believe it strengthens your argument

I'm insisting you call your dog a dog so we don't add confusion to the debate

So stop calling your dog a cat and lets move forward

How does using the formal definition of the actual word we're discussing make me a theist in any sense of the word if I don't believe in any gods?
Click to expand...
No, I am giving you a history lesson and you are attacking me for it.

I am simply telling you where the word Atheos COMES FROM. I am NOT saying that modern Christians are Modern Atheists.

You told me "Gods have to be all powerful and all knowing", and I am just replying by telling you that that is a NEW qualification, and that Gods have NEVER been all powerful and all knowing.

If you HAVE to believe in an all powerful all knowing God to be theist, then me and you are both Atheists by your definition. And we are sitting here arguing about history. Do you see that?
 
Finshaggy

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
You don't get to define "your Gods", you are required to use the formal definition

I ask you again, what's stopping me from defining my dog as a cat?
Click to expand...
Please come back when you have some rationality and can follow things that happen based on things you say. I did not randomly throw out definitions, I am replying to things YOU say. And I did not call a dog a cat. I called a Cave man a cave man, and a modern man a modern man.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Finshaggy said:
No, I am giving you a history lesson and you are attacking me for it.

I am simply telling you where the word Atheos COMES FROM. I am NOT saying that modern Christians are Modern Atheists.

You told me "Gods have to be all powerful and all knowing", and I am just replying by telling you that that is a NEW qualification, and that Gods have NEVER been all powerful and all knowing.

If you HAVE to believe in an all powerful all knowing God to be theist, then me and you are both Atheists by your definition. And we are sitting here arguing about history. Do you see that?
Click to expand...
What makes you think the ancient definition of the word "God" is better or more practical than the modern definition? Do you use ancient medical practices, ancient education, ancient anything?

At one point in time, what we knew as the world encompassed only Europe and Asia minor. Now we know better, so it would be foolish to debate somebody about Australia still using that ancient definition, right? I'd imagine they'd be presenting similar arguments.

"I live in Australia"

"You don't live in my definition of the world, there is no such thing as Australia"

"OK, mate.."

We use modern formal definitions for a very specific reason, and it's to avoid situations like these in common dialogue
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Finshaggy said:
Please come back when you have some rationality and can follow things that happen based on things you say. I did not randomly throw out definitions, I am replying to things YOU say. And I did not call a dog a cat. I called a Cave man a cave man, and a modern man a modern man.
Click to expand...
You are trying to redefine the modern formal definition of "God" to suit your beliefs
 
Finshaggy

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
You haven't defined any gods
Click to expand...
Jupiter is one of my Gods. I can see it at certain times of the year and by watching it I get signals about the seasons.

My ancestors wrote down different plants and associated them with different planets, so that I would know when to plant and harvest them, as well as find them in the wild. They called this knowledge "Gods" because it sustained their life, and was shared with everyone as much as possible, even children.

Then people came along and started telling us that our measurements of "years" and "seasons" was evil, especially since we liked to get high with our Gods.

They told us that God can't exist on Earth or in the form of an animal, and said that we have to look to the sky. But we aren't allowed to look their for the Gods that help us with the plants. Then they killed most of us and established nations, declaring that God helped them and that he resided in the sky.

My Gods still reside on Earth and in plants, as well as in the sky. Remember how Jupiter helps me? I am not saying that Shiva is "inside Marijuana" I am saying that Shiva is the same thing as "being high" they just didn't call it being high before, they would take a hit and say "I'm feeling so Shiva right now".

These are my Gods. Basically, planets interacting with each other, while interacting with stars, while sustaining life on a little blue ball. And all of those actions and things have names, you may not consider them Gods, but they are. I am not saying that God is reaching down from heaven to make Earth work, I am saying that myself and ancient people saw Gods differently than you and the Christians do.
 
Finshaggy

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
What makes you think the ancient definition of the word "God" is better or more practical than the modern definition? Do you use ancient medical practices, ancient education, ancient anything?

At one point in time, what we knew as the world encompassed only Europe and Asia minor. Now we know better, so it would be foolish to debate somebody about Australia still using that ancient definition, right? I'd imagine they'd be presenting similar arguments.

"I live in Australia"

"You don't live in my definition of the world, there is no such thing as Australia"

"OK, mate.."

We use modern formal definitions for a very specific reason, and it's to avoid situations like these in common dialogue
Click to expand...
I never said any definition was "better". I said that you are wrong in wanting God to be "All powerfull, etc". I am not saying whose God is "better" I am saying that your definition of a God does not define a real thing. The thing you are defining is not real, you got the idea from the Christians.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Finshaggy said:
These are my Gods. Basically, planets interacting with each other, while interacting with stars, while sustaining life on a little blue ball. And all of those actions and things have names, you may not consider them Gods, but they are.
Click to expand...
You are having so much issue in the youtube community because you refuse to acknowledge or respect how the process of debate actually works. You are going at it with how you want it to work, and when people tell you otherwise you just say they're wrong and that's that

That's why I don't debate creationists

If you're allowed to just redefine anything you want, nothing would have any meaning
 
Finshaggy

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
You are having so much issue in the youtube community because you refuse to acknowledge or respect how the process of debate actually works. You are going at it with how you want it to work, and when people tell you otherwise you just say they're wrong and that's that

That's why I don't debate creationists

If you're allowed to just redefine anything you want, nothing would have any meaning
Click to expand...
LOFL

If you are going to sit here and act like the bullshit that happens on youtube is "debates" and not "circular arguing" then you are more far gone than I thought. And I have no problems with the Youtube community, in fact many of them use my arguments. I have heard the atheists using the "Phallacy Phallacy" that I taught them.

I am not redefining anything, I am just trying to convince you to stop being a Christian. Your God is false.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Finshaggy said:
LOFL

If you are going to sit here and act like the bullshit that happens on youtube is "debates" and not "circular arguing" then you are more far gone than I thought. And I have no problems with the Youtube community, in fact many of them use my arguments. I have heard the atheists using the "Phallacy Phallacy" that I taught them.

I am not redefining anything, I am just trying to convince you to stop being a Christian. Your God is false.
Click to expand...
What is the "Phallacy Phallacy" argument?

Understanding and accepting the definition of "God" doesn't mean you believe in God. The only way I would be a Christian is if I actually believed Jesus is God.
 
Finshaggy

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
So I posted the Atheist Treadmill thing, and on a forum an Atheist kinda got angry with me. Then he realized I was not arguing for Christianity, so he paused for a moment and was talking casually about the Matt Dillahunty, Sye Ten debate with me. I told him that I don't think Sye Ten has a single brain cell in his head, but Matt Dillahinty still got caught in the presup, so it wasn't a clear win.



Then he said he would debate me, and I went ahead and sent something to him, because I am pretty sure a video debate would just devolve into insults since he is defending himself against the things I said, and I only ever said anything about "Shit Slinging Atheists" so he must feel like that fits him, or he would not have tried to defend against it. Everyone knows there are atheists that don't know what they are talking about that just hate religion, they are shit slingers. You don't have to identify with them if you are Atheist, they are just a group of people that don't understand what they are fighting.



But anyways.

I send him the thing explaining my Gods, and instead of being able to prove me wrong he retreats to "Those are lower case gods, not God". And I told him that things change over time, for example, "Atheos" was the original word for "Atheist", and it referred to people who did not believe in the popular Gods like Zeus. So in Greek times, this was a reference to Jews and Christians, because the Greeks worshiped the planets. They called Jupiter "Zeus" and they called History"Clio" and they called tutors "Mentor", We still use the word "Mentor" today to explain how someone is embodying the spirit of helping us learn.



So I tell him this, and he gets all twisted, saying that "Atheists can't have Gods" and I had to explain to him that the only reason I was putting it in historical context, was because he was saying that Gods can only be "All Powerful, All Knowing sky men".



And I tried to tell him that I was not trying to say that modern Christians are Atheists, I was saying that the word Atheist comes from Atheos which came from Christians, who worshiped a man. Not Gods like the Greeks. So the Greeks called them "Atheos".



Then he told me I had not told him what my God was, and never gave him a definition. So I explained to him how the seasons move with the planets and the plants are planted and harvested based on those changes. Ancient people called those Gods, and I am calling them Gods.



Then I told him to stop being a Christian, because only Christians, Jews and Muslims think God is an all powerful all knowing being. And most of the world lives in China and India, so MOST OF THE WORLD doesn't even agree with the idea of the Christian God.



And he won't give it up. He says he is Atheist, but he will only accept an all powerful, all knowing sky daddy. Doesn't that make you Christian?
 
Finshaggy

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
What is the "Phallacy Phallacy" argument?

Understanding and accepting the definition of "God" doesn't mean you believe in God. The only way I would be a Christian is if I actually believed Jesus is God.
Click to expand...
The Phallacy Phallacy means that just because you have found a Phallacy, does not mean that the entire argument is wrong, it just means there is a phallacy. And that's a real Phallacy, not one I made up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top