Quote from: BADecker on May 05, 2017, 09:24:52 PM

Quote from: stats on May 05, 2017, 03:22:06 PM

Quote from: Okurkabinladin on May 05, 2017, 02:56:58 PM

Quote from: stats on May 05, 2017, 07:18:04 AM

Quote from: CoinCube on May 04, 2017, 06:03:30 PM

Quote from: stats on May 04, 2017, 02:24:45 PM

I figured you to be more intelligent that that.

Quote from: stats on May 04, 2017, 04:37:04 PM

...
Interesting how you take the stance against me, yet have never mentioned the same context when BADecker makes comments about people belonging in mental institutions (funny farm) and having low intelligence.

CoinCube, can I suggest you take a long hard critical look at the way in which BADecker has argued his point, and the language with which he treats others to validate his point before defending him with your righteous comments.

You again misunderstand me stats. I am not defending BADecker he is entirely capable of defending himself.

The reality is I do challenge BADecker when I disagree with what he says. In fact I have done so in this very thread.
See: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1373864.msg13990595#msg13990595

What I am doing here is defending BADecker's correct conclusions. The truth of these conclusions rest on their own merit regardless of whatever BADecker has or has not said in the past.

Quote from: stats on May 04, 2017, 09:46:05 AM

Religion is all faith.... no truth!

As an aside I also challenge this statement of yours as false. However, unlike the simple logical fallacy above this is a deeper point of contention. If you are interested in why this statement is false I would direct you to the following link.

Debate on Nihilism

@CoinCube...... when I stated that "I figured you to more intelligent than that", this was not an inflammatory claim, nor was it implying a low intelligence. It is simply stating that I thought your intelligence was greater than what I since believe. Should you determine that it was a statement of low intelligence or an inflammatory comment against yourself, then that is by your own thought process and not mine. In essence, your belief in my logical fallacy in that situation is flawed.

You claim that you are defending BADecker's conclusions, yet, his words state "When they believe in something that they do not know is truth and fact, they have religion.". I simply agreed that the comment was correct. This comment alone confirms that BADecker agrees that religion is not truth and fact.

Having read your link, I will concede that my statement of "Religion is all faith.... no truth" I will concede that a level of truth does occur in religion, but only to the individual and/or a core group of people with the same ideology. This does not make it factual for everyone.

I have no issue with a person having faith, in fact I congratulate them on their faith as it is a personal choice they make which best suits them.

If you congratulate people, who inherently understand, that their life is valuable and purposeful, then why do you come here and spends more and more of yours and their time trying to tell them they are wrong?

Do Ten commandments offend you so much?

By the way, nobody here ever wrote that Bible in its present or past state is literal word of God. Rather it is account of past witnesses, who came closer to Him.

Bible is not Quran. It is and should be subject to interpretation, not step by step tutorial.

I have no drama with people following religion...... I have problem when they tell me it is the truth and condemn me for the life I choose.

Show me the proof of your god before trying to tell me that I am wrong. I have never said any person here is living their life wrong.... I just expect some proof to their points they raise. Real proof..... not BADecker's assumptions.

The Bible an account of witnesses.......

When your God and Moses spoke on Mount Sinai, there was no-on else present...... how then can the bible be an account of witnesses? It is a fictional story..... nothing more.

The 10 commandments do not worry me at all..... I find some of them to be correct. They are not my commandments, but the do fit with my sense of what is right.

If you say that the bible is open to interpretation, and another says the bible is the word of your god, and the bible says you should follow the word of your god, then who is correct? Do you interpret or follow it implicitly?

Since you only believe what you want to believe, there is no way to prove the existence of God to you. Rather than have proof knowledge, you want to believe whatever you want to believe, whether or not it is correct.

Since I have shown science proof of God that has been known ever since science has been around, you are proving to reject science.

The next best proof is nature, and then the Bible witness. Since you reject all these, you are holding yourself up to be better than science and witnesses and nature. What proof do you have that you are better than these?

Cool

You have not provided proof.

Provide me with some and we can discuss further.