Author Topic: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?  (Read 19941 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Ivellios

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1077
  • Darwins +52/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Seek and Ye Shall Find
Re: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?
« Reply #319 on: January 13, 2014, 12:03:33 PM »
If he ever was a muslim, he would be an apostate now, and they hate those more than anyone else. They're actually commanded to kill apostates.

Offline Jesuis

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Darwins +10/-160
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?
« Reply #320 on: January 13, 2014, 12:33:55 PM »
Its your belief that eternity goes on forever - there is no proof of that.

Incorrect, eternity is a word, and that word can be defined as forever.
Thus if you use the right definition, eternity means forever.

If you want to argue that words are not as they are defined as, do so in the chatter area.

You just proved how you do not understand and that was my point.
Lets say then you accept the word Eternity because it is in the dictionary and it means Eternal. So is the word God.  It is a word like Eternity meaning it is eternal and you accept that by your faith that the dictionary(unknown author) is correct. According to you. The word is be definition makes it so. Not much to conclude apart from my original statement. Some just o not understand the answers given.
According to Theists: Theists know God, Atheists don't.

Offline Ivellios

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1077
  • Darwins +52/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Seek and Ye Shall Find
Re: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?
« Reply #321 on: January 13, 2014, 12:49:23 PM »
You just proved how you do not understand and that was my point.
Lets say then you accept the word Eternity because it is in the dictionary and it means Eternal. So is the word God.  It is a word like Eternity meaning it is eternal and you accept that by your faith that the dictionary(unknown author) is correct. According to you. The word is be definition makes it so. Not much to conclude apart from my original statement. Some just o not understand the answers given.

wow, just wow.

If you cannot trust the dictionary, what can you trust? But because the dictionary is true, the bible is true? Or, are you saying, "The bible is true despite the dictionary being false?

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/eternity?s=t
eternity ?

e·ter·ni·ty  [ih-tur-ni-tee]  Show IPA
noun, plural e·ter·ni·ties.
1. infinite time; duration without beginning or end.
2. eternal existence, especially as contrasted with mortal life: the eternity of God.
3. Theology . the timeless state into which the soul passes at a person's death.
4. an endless or seemingly endless period of time: We had to wait an eternity for the check to arrive.
5. eternities, the truths or realities of life and thought that are regarded as timeless or eternal.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/eternal

e·ter·nal  [ih-tur-nl]  Show IPA
adjective
1. without beginning or end; lasting forever; always existing (opposed to temporal ): eternal life.
2. perpetual; ceaseless; endless: eternal quarreling; eternal chatter.
3. enduring; immutable: eternal principles.
4. Metaphysics . existing outside all relations of time; not subject to change.
noun
5. something that is eternal.
6. the Eternal, God.

Italicized: Well, I was once taught in school that you cannot use a particular word in it's very own definition. That's circular logic in it's truest form, making the definition meaningless. 

Bolded: Proof that A&A was correct about Eternity being Forever as GB put it, "It is defined as forever." No matter how much you wish to deny reaity, it's still here.

A dictionary is used as a tool so that when you use words, we know what you mean, and when we use words, you know what we mean. It's a reference book. When you cannot establish a shared meaning of a word, communication is difficult, or even worthless. Since you're redefining as you type, it's no wonder we don't get what you're saying, since you're not communicating in any meaningful way. As I stated before, guess upon whom falls that responsibility?
« Last Edit: January 13, 2014, 02:44:41 PM by Ivellios »

Offline Jesuis

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Darwins +10/-160
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?
« Reply #322 on: January 13, 2014, 12:58:01 PM »

If there was a truly good and godly god, it would be clear.  No nagging doubts, no endless arguments.  It would be clear and obvious to all.  The fact that it isn't may not necessarily mean there isn't a god out there.  But it sure makes it clear that there is something seriously wrong with the picture.
There probably is no need to answer or there are answers and no one understand it.
For instance many people perhaps cannot explain what frequencies are - they therefore lack the ability or vocabulary to explain said unknown - however it does not mean frequencies do not exist. Some things that were written for a primitve mind relative to science cannot be understood by those with a different mental and vocabulary make up. One would say it is all relative to the receiver.

I'm finding quite amusing that you are illustrating the original post's point.
Forgive me for my ignorance, but can you explain why you say that?

Because he states a truly good god would make it clear, and you appeal to how it has to be unclear. Are you saying your god lacks the ability to make it clear, or the will to make it clear?
Since one is accepting that there is such a thing as a truly good God then the problem is not with God not being truly good or with it making itself unclear but more to do with the individuals trying to interpret and not comprehending what a truly good God means relative to its perhaps eternal consciousness and awareness versus our lack of.
According to Theists: Theists know God, Atheists don't.

Offline Ivellios

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1077
  • Darwins +52/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Seek and Ye Shall Find
Re: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?
« Reply #323 on: January 13, 2014, 01:10:52 PM »
Since one is accepting that there is such a thing as a truly good God then the problem is not with God not being truly good or with it making itself unclear but more to do with the individuals trying to interpret and not comprehending what a truly good God means relative to its perhaps eternal consciousness and awareness versus our lack of.

What...

the...

???????

The only one "accepting that there is such a thing as a truely good god" is you. ie Christians who assert they follow a Perfect, All-Knowing, All-Loving, All-Powerful good god. That loves us so much, and wants a relationship with us, but we have to do all the work, and talking to him is like talking to a brick wall. An All-knowing God would see the results, rather know beforehand, of which methods of communication would work, and which ones would not. If God was all-knowing, and All-loving and good, then he'd find a way that you would understand the first time, for all time. If there is a miscommunication or a misunderstanding then it is the one who can look into one's kokoro[1] and should know the best way to communicate to us.

Edit: punctuation and grammar, as evidenced by hatter's quote.
 1. japanese: heart, mind, soul. all 3 for the price of 1. ~.^ since 'soul' is indistinguishable from one's mind
« Last Edit: January 13, 2014, 01:24:59 PM by Ivellios »

Offline MadBunny

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3561
  • Darwins +110/-0
  • Fallen Illuminatus
Re: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?
« Reply #324 on: January 13, 2014, 01:11:48 PM »
He's so Muslim that he CONSTANTLY praises god at the end of every speech and address, attends a Christian church every week, eats non-halal food, lets his wife and kids run around bareheaded and bare armed.

Makes me wonder if it would be an issue if Obama was Muslim. If so why? Why does Obama's religious identity matter to them so long as it is not in the extreme? I don’t get these people.

I suspect the problem isn't religion so much as skin pigmentation.
Give a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a night.  Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3880
  • Darwins +257/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?
« Reply #325 on: January 13, 2014, 01:18:24 PM »
An All-knowing God would see the results, rather know beforehand the results of which methods of communication would work and which ones would not.

Precisely what I am saying and what the theist is finding so hard to answer a direct question, directly.

Perhaps the title should be "Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question without dodging and obfuscation?"
« Last Edit: January 13, 2014, 01:50:22 PM by Hatter23 »
An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3880
  • Darwins +257/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?
« Reply #326 on: January 13, 2014, 01:25:57 PM »
He's so Muslim that he CONSTANTLY praises god at the end of every speech and address, attends a Christian church every week, eats non-halal food, lets his wife and kids run around bareheaded and bare armed.

Makes me wonder if it would be an issue if Obama was Muslim. If so why? Why does Obama's religious identity matter to them so long as it is not in the extreme? I don’t get these people.

I suspect the problem isn't religion so much as skin pigmentation.

While I hate the meme, "Everyone who dislikes Obama is a racist;" I have come to the conclusion " Every Birther and person who claims Obama is a Muslim is very likely a racist"

 

An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Offline Jesuis

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Darwins +10/-160
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?
« Reply #327 on: January 13, 2014, 01:26:46 PM »
You just proved how you do not understand and that was my point.
Lets say then you accept the word Eternity because it is in the dictionary and it means Eternal. So is the word God.  It is a word like Eternity meaning it is eternal and you accept that by your faith that the dictionary(unknown author) is correct. According to you. The word is be definition makes it so. Not much to conclude apart from my original statement. Some just o not understand the answers given.

wow, just wow.

If you cannot trust the dictionary, what can you trust? But because the dictionary is true, the bible is true? Or, are you saying, "The bible is true despite the dictionary being false?

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/eternity?s=t
eternity ?

e·ter·ni·ty  [ih-tur-ni-tee]  Show IPA
noun, plural e·ter·ni·ties.
1. infinite time; duration without beginning or end.
2. eternal existence, especially as contrasted with mortal life: the eternity of God.
3. Theology . the timeless state into which the soul passes at a person's death.
4. an endless or seemingly endless period of time: We had to wait an eternity for the check to arrive.
5. eternities, the truths or realities of life and thought that are regarded as timeless or eternal.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/eternal

e·ter·nal  [ih-tur-nl]  Show IPA
adjective
1. without beginning or end; lasting forever; always existing (opposed to temporal ): eternal life.
2. perpetual; ceaseless; endless: eternal quarreling; eternal chatter.
3. enduring; immutable: eternal principles.
4. Metaphysics . existing outside all relations of time; not subject to change.
noun
5. something that is eternal.
6. the Eternal, God.

Italicized: Well, I was once taught in school that you cannot use a particular word in it's very own definition. That's circular logic in it's truest form, making the definition meaningless. 

Bolded: Proof that A&A was correct about Eternity being Forever as GB put it, "It is defined as forever." No matter how much you wish to deny reaity, it's still here.

A dictionary is used as a meduim so that when you use words, we know what you mean, and when we use words, you know what we mean. It's a reference book. When you cannot establish a shared meaning of a word, communication is difficult, or even worthless. Since you're redefining as you type, it's no wonder we don't get what you're saying, since you're not communicating in any meaningful way. As I stated before, guess upon whom falls that responsibility?
You said "If you cannot trust the dictionary what can you trust".
All it takes is for you to have faith in it and to believe in it, but the dictionary is not a person of truth nor a holder of wisdom yet you trust it - maybe out of the fear or the insecurity that if it be wrong you lose all -- it weilds such power over you for you to have placed it in such an important role in your existence. It is my understanding that it is simply a collection of thoughts an ideas pertaining to meanings which are forever evolving with time. Not to be taken as dogmatic but as a tool. Its meanings come and go depending on the day and popular usage by us humans who use words to express an inner working of their minds consciousness and thus by definition gives rise to more meaningless expressions which is not eternally embedded in stone but flexible with time. It would be unwise for us to hold it up as an authority in eternity especially when trying to clarify something so all conscious and so eternal as God - don't you think?

That is of course if you accept the definition of God as eternal thus making you a believer that it exists because it is in the dictionary resulting in circular argument leading to your defeat.  {all relative to yourself and those who believe in the dictionary of course}. Maybe this believing an trusting and having faith in the dictionary is a problem for certain human beings. Perhaps the vocabulary is not completed for them to fully understand the frequency of the meaning of the God. Peace.
According to Theists: Theists know God, Atheists don't.

Offline Jesuis

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Darwins +10/-160
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?
« Reply #328 on: January 13, 2014, 01:31:23 PM »
Since one is accepting that there is such a thing as a truly good God then the problem is not with God not being truly good or with it making itself unclear but more to do with the individuals trying to interpret and not comprehending what a truly good God means relative to its perhaps eternal consciousness and awareness versus our lack of.

What...

the...

???????

The only one "accepting that there is such a thing as a truely good god" is you. ie Christians who assert they follow a Perfect, All-Knowing, All-Loving, All-Powerful good god. That loves us so much, and wants a relationship with us, but we have to do all the work, and talking to him is like talking to a brick wall. An All-knowing God would see the results, rather know beforehand, of which methods of communication would work, and which ones would not. If God was all-knowing, and All-loving and good, then he'd find a way that you would understand the first time, for all time. If there is a miscommunication or a misunderstanding then it is the one who can look into one's kokoro[1] and should know the best way to communicate to us.

Edit: punctuation and grammar, as evidenced by hatter's quote.
 1. japanese: heart, mind, soul. all 3 for the price of 1. ~.^ since 'soul' is indistinguishable from one's mind
Are you positive about all of this? One would say there are a lot of unknowns and broad sweeping statemets in this post.
According to Theists: Theists know God, Atheists don't.

Offline G-Roll

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 371
  • Darwins +42/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?
« Reply #329 on: January 13, 2014, 01:36:53 PM »
He's so Muslim that he CONSTANTLY praises god at the end of every speech and address, attends a Christian church every week, eats non-halal food, lets his wife and kids run around bareheaded and bare armed.

Makes me wonder if it would be an issue if Obama was Muslim. If so why? Why does Obama's religious identity matter to them so long as it is not in the extreme? I don’t get these people.

I suspect the problem isn't religion so much as skin pigmentation.

I figured it was the us vs them/tribalism thing. If he was Muslim then he is not one of us, thus not worthy of the title or job of president. Skin pigmentation maybe.. but I think it’s the religion that they have an issue with and the images of other religions being their enemies rather than their countrymen.

Offline jdawg70

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1973
  • Darwins +355/-8
  • Ex-rosary squad
Re: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?
« Reply #330 on: January 13, 2014, 01:37:55 PM »
Perhaps the vocabulary is not completed for them to fully understand the frequency of the meaning of the God. Peace.
Jesuis, you are correct in saying that vocabulary - words - do not affect reality, but are merely tools to help us communicate in our way to describe reality.

The problem, however, is that you don't seem to be making an attempt to establish common ground on what words mean.  I think the back-and-forth with the word 'eternity' is one instance.  From what I've put in bold above, 'frequency' appears to be another.

When you ask for proof that 'eternity' lasts 'forever'...well, that's kind of like asking for proof that 'red' is 'red', or asking for proof that 'yes' is the opposite of 'no'.  The word 'eternity' denotes something that lasts 'forever'.  You can argue whether something can or cannot last forever, or for eternity, but it is silly to ask for proof that 'eternity' lasts 'forever'.

I cannot understand the phrase "frequency of the meaning of god".  That is, that arrangement of symbols does not convey, express, or communicate an idea or concept that is coherent.  Colorless green ideas sleep furiously and all that jazz.  Perhaps clarification on what you mean by 'frequency', or 'meaning', or 'god' would help.
"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."
- Eddie Izzard

Offline G-Roll

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 371
  • Darwins +42/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?
« Reply #331 on: January 13, 2014, 01:42:40 PM »
That is of course if you accept the definition of God as eternal thus making you a believer that it exists because it is in the dictionary resulting in circular argument leading to your defeat.  {all relative to yourself and those who believe in the dictionary of course}. Maybe this believing an trusting and having faith in the dictionary is a problem for certain human beings. Perhaps the vocabulary is not completed for them to fully understand the frequency of the meaning of the God. Peace

Haha. I like this guy he is silly.

Offline Ivellios

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1077
  • Darwins +52/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Seek and Ye Shall Find
Re: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?
« Reply #332 on: January 13, 2014, 01:45:49 PM »
Perhaps the vocabulary is not completed for them to fully understand the frequency of the meaning of the God. Peace.
Jesuis, you are correct in saying that vocabulary - words - do not affect reality, but are merely tools to help us communicate in our way to describe reality.

The problem, however, is that you don't seem to be making an attempt to establish common ground on what words mean.  I think the back-and-forth with the word 'eternity' is one instance.  From what I've put in bold above, 'frequency' appears to be another.

When you ask for proof that 'eternity' lasts 'forever'...well, that's kind of like asking for proof that 'red' is 'red', or asking for proof that 'yes' is the opposite of 'no'.  The word 'eternity' denotes something that lasts 'forever'.  You can argue whether something can or cannot last forever, or for eternity, but it is silly to ask for proof that 'eternity' lasts 'forever'.

I cannot understand the phrase "frequency of the meaning of god".  That is, that arrangement of symbols does not convey, express, or communicate an idea or concept that is coherent.  Colorless green ideas sleep furiously and all that jazz.  Perhaps clarification on what you mean by 'frequency', or 'meaning', or 'god' would help.

He's probably watched one too many Star Trek: TNG episodes and how a different 'frequency' fixed everything.

Online xyzzy

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 136
  • Darwins +48/-0
  • "Nothing happens"
    • xyzzy
Re: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?
« Reply #333 on: January 13, 2014, 01:46:14 PM »
or this...
On April 7, 2009, the Department of Homeland Security issued a controversial report on "rightwing
extremism." Titled Rightwing Extremism : Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in
Radicalization and Recruitment , its warning seems to be aimed at creating a special class of
Americans: those who question and resist the rapid shift to socialism. These targeted groups (who
still appreciate our Constitution and its promised human rights) must now be vilified as "the enemy
of the people" -- a dangerous threat to peace and unity. According to this report,
http://www.crossroad.to/News/homeland.htm

For those who say things about Jihad envy or some garbage like that. I challenge you to find talk like this any where about muslims. This is happening and you are in it.

Do you really want to get into a discussion of how fucking stupid this is?  Let me guess, you're all about Benghazi, Obama being a Muslim/Kenyan, and health care being the new slavery.  Muslims are not a danger to this country right now, its people like you.   

Let's not let harbinger deflect us from the fact that the position he's defending was this one:

This is an answer. An individual answer. A stand. I can respect that much. I guess it pleases you to know for some odd reason Homeland security named the fundamental Christian public enemy #1 in America. I think 2013.
The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool -- Richard Feynman
You are in a maze of twisty little religions, all alike -- xyzzy

Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3880
  • Darwins +257/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?
« Reply #334 on: January 13, 2014, 01:46:33 PM »
All it takes is for you to have faith in it and to believe in it, but the dictionary is not a person of truth nor a holder of wisdom yet you trust it - maybe out of the fear or the insecurity that if it be wrong you lose all -- it weilds such power over you for you to have placed it in such an important role in your existence. It is my understanding that it is simply a collection of thoughts an ideas pertaining to meanings which are forever evolving with time.

Yet another attempt to avoid the obvious and create enough of a gap for your rjhsl;ehjzxdthmxdbmbnlmk  to fit in. I know the old fashioned term is "god" but  "rjhsl;ehjzxdthmxdbmbnlmk " just evolved in language in the last 90 seconds.

An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Offline jdawg70

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1973
  • Darwins +355/-8
  • Ex-rosary squad
Re: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?
« Reply #335 on: January 13, 2014, 01:48:31 PM »
Yet another attempt to avoid the obvious and create enough of a gap for your rjhsl;ehjzxdthmxdbmbnlmk  to fit in. I know the old fashioned term is "god" but  "rjhsl;ehjzxdthmxdbmbnlmk " just evolved in language in the last 90 seconds.

A semi-colon?  You're a f**king heretic!  BURN THE WITCH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."
- Eddie Izzard

Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3880
  • Darwins +257/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?
« Reply #336 on: January 13, 2014, 01:57:03 PM »
You just proved how you do not understand and that was my point.
Lets say then you accept the word Eternity because it is in the dictionary and it means Eternal. So is the word God.  It is a word like Eternity meaning it is eternal and you accept that by your faith that the dictionary(unknown author) is correct. According to you. The word is be definition makes it so. Not much to conclude apart from my original statement. Some just o not understand the answers given.

wow, just wow.

If you cannot trust the dictionary, what can you trust? But because the dictionary is true, the bible is true? Or, are you
That is of course if you accept the definition of God as eternal thus making you a believer that it exists because it is in the dictionary resulting in circular argument leading to your defeat. 


Dragon:

1. A mythical monster traditionally represented as a gigantic reptile having a lion's claws, the tail of a serpent, wings, and a scaly skin.


If I accept the definition as correct, by your manner of reasoning, Dragons must exist.

Oni

Oni (?) are a kind of y?kai from Japanese folklore, variously translated as demons, devils, ogres or trolls. They are popular characters in Japanese art, literature and theatre.[1]

Depictions of oni vary widely but usually portray them as hideous, gigantic ogre-like creatures with sharp claws, wild hair, and two long horns growing from their heads.[2] They are humanoid for the most part, but occasionally, they are shown with unnatural features such as odd numbers of eyes or extra fingers and toes.[3] Their skin may be any number of colors, but red and blue are particularly common.[4][5]

They are often depicted wearing tiger-skin loincloths and carrying iron clubs, called kanab? (??). This image leads to the expression "oni with an iron club" (????, oni-ni-kanab?), that is, to be invincible or undefeatable. It can also be used in the sense of "strong beyond strong", or having one's natural quality enhanced or supplemented by the use of some tool.[6][7]

If I accept the definition as correct, by your manner of reasoning, Oni must exist.


Harpy

In Greek mythology, a harpy (Greek: ??????, harpyia, pronounced [hárpuja]; Latin: harpeia) was one of the winged spirits best known for constantly stealing all food from Phineus. The literal meaning of the word seems to be "that which snatches" as it comes from the Greek word harpazein (????????), which means "to snatch".

A harpy was the mother of the horses of Achilles sired by the West Wind Zephyros .[1]

Hesiod[2] calls them two "lovely-haired" creatures, and pottery art depicting the harpies featured beautiful women with wings. Harpies as ugly winged bird-women, e.g. in Aeschylus' The Eumenides (line 50) are a late development, due to a confusion with the Sirens. Roman and Byzantine writers detailed their ugliness.[3]



If I accept the definition as correct, by your manner of reasoning, Harpies must exist.

An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Offline median

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1848
  • Darwins +201/-16
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
    • Talk Origins
Re: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?
« Reply #337 on: January 13, 2014, 02:26:16 PM »
I have never backed down from a question. I even solved the problem of evil and one of the posters on here still has the quote in his signature. That tells me atheists ignore the answers we give.


NOPE! YOU-DID-NOT "solve" the problem of evil. YOU CLAIMED THAT YOU SOLVED IT. But SAYING you solved it doesn't mean you did. Sorry. FAIL.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

Offline Ivellios

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1077
  • Darwins +52/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Seek and Ye Shall Find
Re: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?
« Reply #338 on: January 13, 2014, 02:29:00 PM »
You said "If you cannot trust the dictionary what can you trust".
All it takes is for you to have faith in it and to believe in it, but the dictionary is not a person of truth nor a holder of wisdom yet you trust it

It is a reference book. A tool used to help communication by establishing meanings to words. Without common meanings for words, we would never have left the caves. I 'trust' it as a means to communicate, just as much as I trust a pencil, paper and my keyboard. I'm not going to glean any wisdom from them, but I 'trust' or have 'faith' that by using them, I can communicate with others.

- maybe out of the fear or the insecurity that if it be wrong you lose all -- it weilds such power over you for you to have placed it in such an important role in your existence.

nonsensical babbling. Oooha booga whikiki foolic schiknop! Without a common reference point, what you say is as meaningless as this.

It is my understanding that it is simply a collection of thoughts an ideas pertaining to meanings which are forever evolving with time. Not to be taken as dogmatic but as a tool. Its meanings come and go depending on the day and popular usage by us humans who use words to express an inner working of their minds consciousness and thus by definition gives rise to more meaningless expressions which is not eternally embedded in stone but flexible with time.

Considering I already stated in a previous post that it was simply a reference book, a tool for communication...  &)

It would be unwise for us to hold it up as an authority in eternity especially when trying to clarify something so all conscious and so eternal as God - don't you think?

As a contemporary tool for using language as a medium to communicate to each other, it only holds as much 'authority' as long as the people conversing agree on the definitions. Considering you've made up a different meaning for 'eternity' than the established one that most of us are using, I have no idea what you're saying, and it is therefore maningless. It has nothing with me being stupid, but you in your ifivite wisdoe deciping to be misindersdood pon purposk. As for the definition of eternal that I am aware of, there is nothing eternal, endless, timeless. Everything will end. It may take 50 billion years, but that is still nothing compared to 'eternity.'   

That is of course if you accept the definition of God as eternal thus making you a believer that it exists because it is in the dictionary resulting in circular argument leading to your defeat.

Will you stop projecting? I accept that there is a definition of 'eternal'. As a real word it has a meaning. Something being eternal, is another matter entirely.

{all relative to yourself and those who believe in the dictionary of course}.  Maybe this believing an trusting and having faith in the dictionary is a problem for certain human beings.

 &)

Perhaps the vocabulary is not completed for them to fully understand the frequency of the meaning of the God. Peace.

Watched too many Star Trek: TNG episodes? Just need to '"Change the frquencies?" Changing said frequencies makes all these things better: Communication[1], Shields[2], Phasors[3], main deflector dish[4], torpedoes, missiles and other ballistic weapons[5], swords, knives and other melee weapons[6].

As A&A asked for earlier. If you would like to be taken seriously instead of someone dismissing what you say with as little effort as a handwave. Please provide some proof.
 1. false, 103.7 is no better than 101.1 and at a different frequency 101.1 listeners cannot hear what's going on at 103.7, and vice-versa)
 2. I had always though of shields as a barrier, not pulsating like a flourescent light. Something that got more powerful the longer power was put into it. Which is why it takes time to 'build,' but if it's going to full to 0 and back over a hundred of times a second, why does it take so long to build?
 3. as light based weapon, it works by frequency, but change the frequency, you change the color.
 4. to communicate, already stated. to deflect, already stated
 5. wtf? seriously!? ooh, the bullet bouce off that tank! we've just gotta change it's frequency!....  &)
 6.  :o  :?  :-\  &)  :'(  to Damn I can't believe I watched something so stupid  :-[
« Last Edit: January 13, 2014, 03:21:02 PM by Ivellios »

Offline Ivellios

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1077
  • Darwins +52/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Seek and Ye Shall Find
Re: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?
« Reply #339 on: January 13, 2014, 02:42:58 PM »
I have never backed down from a question. I even solved the problem of evil and one of the posters on here still has the quote in his signature. That tells me atheists ignore the answers we give.


NOPE! YOU-DID-NOT "solve" the problem of evil. YOU CLAIMED THAT YOU SOLVED IT. But SAYING you solved it doesn't mean you did. Sorry. FAIL.

The lurkers might not have know, but some of us, when he said that, knew the truth. Though I can only speak for myself, but it is highly probable. Considering my reaction was like this:  :? .
« Last Edit: January 13, 2014, 03:23:49 PM by Ivellios »

Offline Jesuis

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Darwins +10/-160
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?
« Reply #340 on: January 13, 2014, 02:47:57 PM »
Perhaps the vocabulary is not completed for them to fully understand the frequency of the meaning of the God. Peace.
Jesuis, you are correct in saying that vocabulary - words - do not affect reality, but are merely tools to help us communicate in our way to describe reality.

The problem, however, is that you don't seem to be making an attempt to establish common ground on what words mean.  I think the back-and-forth with the word 'eternity' is one instance.  From what I've put in bold above, 'frequency' appears to be another.

When you ask for proof that 'eternity' lasts 'forever'...well, that's kind of like asking for proof that 'red' is 'red', or asking for proof that 'yes' is the opposite of 'no'.  The word 'eternity' denotes something that lasts 'forever'.  You can argue whether something can or cannot last forever, or for eternity, but it is silly to ask for proof that 'eternity' lasts 'forever'.

I cannot understand the phrase "frequency of the meaning of god".  That is, that arrangement of symbols does not convey, express, or communicate an idea or concept that is coherent.  Colorless green ideas sleep furiously and all that jazz.  Perhaps clarification on what you mean by 'frequency', or 'meaning', or 'god' would help.
Indeed.
God remains unexplained depending on who we are of course - and it is silly that some can understand immediately and others cannot. Red is Red like God is God.  But such is the way of the world we live in, a world of dualtiy an opposites and laws - but that does not mean God is non existent. Say for example Jesus without doubt knew God but his desciples were not the holders of that wisdom.
A Painter only needs to paint his picture - the observer looking at it tries to explain it but it remains the work of the painter and not anyone else.
According to Theists: Theists know God, Atheists don't.

Offline Ivellios

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1077
  • Darwins +52/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Seek and Ye Shall Find
Re: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?
« Reply #341 on: January 13, 2014, 02:54:42 PM »
The only one "accepting that there is such a thing as a truely good god" is you. ie Christians who assert they follow a Perfect, All-Knowing, All-Loving, All-Powerful good god. That loves us so much, and wants a relationship with us, but we have to do all the work, and talking to him is like talking to a brick wall. An All-knowing God would see the results, rather know beforehand, of which methods of communication would work, and which ones would not. If God was all-knowing, and All-loving and good, then he'd find a way that you would understand the first time, for all time. If there is a miscommunication or a misunderstanding then it is the one who can look into one's kokoro[1] and should know the best way to communicate to us.
 1. japanese: heart, mind, soul. all 3 for the price of 1. ~.^ since 'soul' is indistinguishable from one's mind
Are you positive about all of this? One would say there are a lot of unknowns and broad sweeping statemets in this post.

Considering I used to be a Christian, I've got the good 'ol christian sales pitch, except for the part about heaven and hell. Left out the, "You're a worthless piece of trash that because God loves you, made Him kill himself, so you could go to heaven!" but kept in the rest of what being a christian was like, and simply stated that someone with not precognition but pregnostiction would know better.

So, yes. I am positive and I do not see any "unknowns." Thank you very much. Of course, I use broad sweeping statements. I could never get the knack of turning a paragraph into 20,000 words. My English teachers always threw fits whenever I turned in my essays.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2014, 02:58:54 PM by Ivellios »

Offline SevenPatch

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 703
  • Darwins +108/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • A source will help me understand.
Re: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?
« Reply #342 on: January 13, 2014, 02:55:50 PM »
As I said the "vocabulary" does not clearly align the mentality to the "frequency" of the question to be discussed, but the OP has already presumed "God exists" without properly understanding the meaning or vibration of this word and as such does not understand the answers given relative to the wisdom of such a word. Note this is not a dodge. I am clearly either not understanding your need or lack off. In other words our mental frequencies are not being aligned for if it was we would have no discrepancies.

Amazing, people think differently, i already knew that.

Now can you answer the question directly?
Question: Why is it hard for believers to answer a direct question?
Answer: They are answering "directly" but your lack of understanding seems to be going unnoticed. It is not the answering that is not taking place it is the lack of understanding that is cyclic. It is for you to tell me what word you do not understand or my responses are limited.

Jesuis,

What is your basis for understanding?

Merriam-Webster defines the word “understand” as follows:  to know the meaning of (something, such as the words that someone is saying or a language), to know how (something) works or happens, to know how (someone) thinks, feels or behaves.

How do you know then that the receiver of the answer doesn’t understand the answer?

It can’t be simple agreement.  If I agree with your answer, that doesn’t mean I understand it.  It is also true that if I disagree with your answer, that doesn’t mean I lack understanding.

Additionally the giver of the answer must understand the question, correct?  Perhaps the receiver of the answer doesn’t believe that the giver of the answer understood the question.  If the giver of the answer doesn’t understand the question then perhaps the theist lack of understanding is going unnoticed by the theist.

In my opinion, I think the most direct answer to a direct question would be one that provides the best explanation.  I don’t think your answer provides the best explanation and therefore is not a direct answer.

A possible direct answer to the direct question (Why is it hard for believers to answer a direct question?) is that the believer thinks they know something when they don’t actually know.   My answer to the question provides a good explanation.  Currently it explains why it is hard for you Jesuis to give a direct answer to the direct question, which is because you think you know something when you don’t actually know.  You think you know that the receiver of the answer doesn’t understand the answer when in fact you don’t know if the receiver understands or not.

Additionally, since the believer doesn’t actually know what they think they know they will avoid providing a direct answer to a direct question.  It is much easier to answer directly when you don’t pretend to know something.
"Shut him up! We have a lot invested in this ride - SHUT HIM UP! Look at my furrows of worry! Look at my big bank account, and my family! This just HAS to be real!" - Bill Hicks

Offline Jesuis

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Darwins +10/-160
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?
« Reply #343 on: January 13, 2014, 02:57:36 PM »
You just proved how you do not understand and that was my point.
Lets say then you accept the word Eternity because it is in the dictionary and it means Eternal. So is the word God.  It is a word like Eternity meaning it is eternal and you accept that by your faith that the dictionary(unknown author) is correct. According to you. The word is be definition makes it so. Not much to conclude apart from my original statement. Some just o not understand the answers given.

wow, just wow.

If you cannot trust the dictionary, what can you trust? But because the dictionary is true, the bible is true? Or, are you
That is of course if you accept the definition of God as eternal thus making you a believer that it exists because it is in the dictionary resulting in circular argument leading to your defeat. 


Dragon:

1. A mythical monster traditionally represented as a gigantic reptile having a lion's claws, the tail of a serpent, wings, and a scaly skin.

If I accept the definition as correct, by your manner of reasoning, Dragons must exist.

Oni

Oni (?) are a kind of y?kai from Japanese folklore, variously translated as demons, devils, ogres or trolls. They are popular characters in Japanese art, literature and theatre.[1]

Depictions of oni vary widely but usually portray them as hideous, gigantic ogre-like creatures with sharp claws, wild hair, and two long horns growing from their heads.[2] They are humanoid for the most part, but occasionally, they are shown with unnatural features such as odd numbers of eyes or extra fingers and toes.[3] Their skin may be any number of colors, but red and blue are particularly common.[4][5]

They are often depicted wearing tiger-skin loincloths and carrying iron clubs, called kanab? (??). This image leads to the expression "oni with an iron club" (????, oni-ni-kanab?), that is, to be invincible or undefeatable. It can also be used in the sense of "strong beyond strong", or having one's natural quality enhanced or supplemented by the use of some tool.[6][7]

If I accept the definition as correct, by your manner of reasoning, Oni must exist.


Harpy

In Greek mythology, a harpy (Greek: ??????, harpyia, pronounced [hárpuja]; Latin: harpeia) was one of the winged spirits best known for constantly stealing all food from Phineus. The literal meaning of the word seems to be "that which snatches" as it comes from the Greek word harpazein (????????), which means "to snatch".

A harpy was the mother of the horses of Achilles sired by the West Wind Zephyros .[1]

Hesiod[2] calls them two "lovely-haired" creatures, and pottery art depicting the harpies featured beautiful women with wings. Harpies as ugly winged bird-women, e.g. in Aeschylus' The Eumenides (line 50) are a late development, due to a confusion with the Sirens. Roman and Byzantine writers detailed their ugliness.[3]



If I accept the definition as correct, by your manner of reasoning, Harpies must exist.
No one is asking you to accept anything exists especially that of folk lore.
You are the one saying "If you cannot trust the dictionary what can you trust" I am saying if you are going to use the dictionary as truth and as evidence yoou are going to fail. you would have to be more flexiable by your own reasoning not mine. you are only proving my point.
According to Theists: Theists know God, Atheists don't.

Offline Jesuis

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Darwins +10/-160
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?
« Reply #344 on: January 13, 2014, 03:03:09 PM »
The only one "accepting that there is such a thing as a truely good god" is you. ie Christians who assert they follow a Perfect, All-Knowing, All-Loving, All-Powerful good god. That loves us so much, and wants a relationship with us, but we have to do all the work, and talking to him is like talking to a brick wall. An All-knowing God would see the results, rather know beforehand, of which methods of communication would work, and which ones would not. If God was all-knowing, and All-loving and good, then he'd find a way that you would understand the first time, for all time. If there is a miscommunication or a misunderstanding then it is the one who can look into one's kokoro[1] and should know the best way to communicate to us.
 1. japanese: heart, mind, soul. all 3 for the price of 1. ~.^ since 'soul' is indistinguishable from one's mind
Are you positive about all of this? One would say there are a lot of unknowns and broad sweeping statemets in this post.

Considering I used to be a Christian, I've got the good 'ol christian sales pitch, except for the part about heaven and hell. Left out the, "You're a worthless piece of trash that because God loves you, made Him kill himself, so you could go to heaven!" but kept in the rest of what being a christian was like, and simply stated that someone with not precognition but pregnostiction would know better.

So, yes. I am positive and I do not see any "unknowns." Thank you very much. Of course, I use broad sweeping statements. I could never get the knack of turning a paragraph into 20,000 words. My English teachers always threw fits whenever I turned in my essays.
Well lets not anatagonise you before you blow up. lets leave it like that until our frequencies match. give it time to sink in.
According to Theists: Theists know God, Atheists don't.

Offline Ataraxia

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 521
  • Darwins +79/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • "I am large, I contain multitudes."
Re: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?
« Reply #345 on: January 13, 2014, 03:11:53 PM »
So our "new" resident theist says "frequencies" and BAM! there's god? WTF is this, some new buzzword?
"God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh." - Voltaire

Offline Ivellios

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1077
  • Darwins +52/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Seek and Ye Shall Find
Re: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?
« Reply #346 on: January 13, 2014, 03:13:15 PM »
No one is asking you to accept anything exists especially that of folk lore.
You are the one saying "If you cannot trust the dictionary what can you trust" I am saying if you are going to use the dictionary as truth and as evidence yoou are going to fail. you would have to be more flexiable by your own reasoning not mine. you are only proving my point.

Nope, that wasn't him but me. If only you looked thru the quote history, you'd have seen that. I said it as a joke, but I guess having humor doesn't get thru to someone of your... ano... "frequency?"  &)

I said it since you believe in a book about unicorns, leviathans, flat Earth, zombies, witches with broomsticks well minus the broomsticks, astrologers, fortunetellers, someone that raises from the dead and flies[1], talking snakes and donkeys, many many many other things, gives credence to it, inerrant or somesuch, and expect use to take your word for it and believe it, and when asked why you give us that, "You wouldn't understand if I told you, anyways."

Too bad there isn't a werewolf in there, she could have included it in the 'Twilight' saga.
 1. I'm guessing that makes him a vampire, <checks> drinks blood, yep.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2014, 03:16:42 PM by Ivellios »

Offline Ivellios

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1077
  • Darwins +52/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Seek and Ye Shall Find
Re: Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?
« Reply #347 on: January 13, 2014, 03:15:41 PM »
So our "new" resident theist says "frequencies" and BAM! there's god? WTF is this, some new buzzword?

Dunno, won't prove it. Expects us to take him at his word. Says we wouldn't understand it anyways.