• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is atheism just worship of the devil under different name?

Angel said:
Your shortfall in understanding is not a very good argument for or against anything but the need for edification on your part.

Namaste
Click to expand...

Your inability to make coherent points is not the fault of those who point it out.
 
devildavid said:
All of your arguments have already been historically defeated by philosophy itself.

You brought up the polite company analogy and I simply pointed out how it applies to you. If you don't want it to get personal, stop making it personal.

The idea that any arguments your presented are: 1.Your original arguments. 2. Irrefutable. is not backed by any evidence or the arguments themselves. When shown the flaws, you cry you have been misunderstood. The failure lies with you and your inability to communicate clearly, honestly, and in good faith.
Click to expand...
Let's have your evidence for these allegations. If you can't offer evidence, you're just making this stuff up. And you must know what you always say about making stuff up, mustn't you?


Namaste
 
Angel said:
Let's have your evidence for these allegations. If you can't offer evidence, you're just making this stuff up. And you must know what you always say about making stuff up, mustn't you?


Namaste
Click to expand...

So, our resident expert in philosophy and religion claims not of know of any philosophical refutations of his arguments. Telling.
 
devildavid said:
You mean you honestly don't know? Every argument ever made in philosophy has been refuted. That's what philosophy does.
Click to expand...
Let's have the evidence that an argument of mine posted here at DP has been refuted.
 
Angel said:
Your shortfall in understanding is not a very good argument for or against anything but the need for edification on your part.

Namaste
Click to expand...

I understood all of the Brief History of Time, a book so far above your head that you will never get any of it.

I debate on here principally in the Environment and Energy section. A science heavy area of debate where low intelligence is obvious.

I have read and understood the book Iterlactual Inpostures. It is all about drivel speaking whilst sounding elite. Your tactics are not new.

Your continious dishonesty and evaision is a facet of your character. You will, I expect, never wish to be different and will alawys choose to not deal with the real world. Religion allows you to tell yourself that everybody else is the same. We are not.

I would like to not have to deal with a world where truth has to be shouted because otherwise the untruth will overwhelm the mind space of humanity but that is not this world.
 
Last edited:
late said:
That is a parody.

It's more of a backhanded slap than a refutation.

Which is not to say I agree with the Angelic one. He doesn't actually say anything.
Click to expand...

It exposes the drivel of Post Modernism as he was invited to be their star witness at the conference debating the value of it. How they must not have laughed when he revealed that he was the chief attacker of their drivel.

You need an actual argument to refute before you can refute it.
 
Tim the plumber said:
It exposes the drivel of Post Modernism as he was invited to be their star witness at the conference debating the value of it. How they must not have laughed when he revealed that he was the chief attacker of their drivel.

You need an actual argument to refute before you can refute it.
Click to expand...

Got a source?
 
Tim the plumber said:
Let's have evidence that you have posted a clear coherent argument.
Click to expand...
The claims are that my arguments are unoriginal and refuted. I called the claimant on this and await the evidence.
If you are claiming that any argument of mine is unclear and incoherent, the burden is on you to supply evidence.


Namaste
 
Angel said:
The claims are that my arguments are unoriginal and refuted. I called the claimant on this and await the evidence.
If you are claiming that any argument of mine is unclear and incoherent, the burden is on you to supply evidence.


Namaste
Click to expand...

I asked for evidence that you have ever posted a coherent and clear argument.

Cite 1.

Should be easy.
 
Tim the plumber said:
I asked for evidence that you have ever posted a coherent and clear argument.

Cite 1.

Should be easy.
Click to expand...
I know what you asked. If I asked you for a gift of $1200, are you obligated to provide that gift? You're out of the blue with this line of posts and without justification.
 
Angel said:
I know what you asked. If I asked you for a gift of $1200, are you obligated to provide that gift? You're out of the blue with this line of posts and without justification.
Click to expand...

Your reply says that it would be at least extremely difficult, well we all know impossible, for you to show any clear, coherent argument you have ever posted here.

Your tactic of never being wrong by never actaully saying anything clearly or if you do denying it almost imediately makes it so.
 
Angel said:
I know what you asked. If I asked you for a gift of $1200, are you obligated to provide that gift? You're out of the blue with this line of posts and without justification.
Click to expand...

I find most all of them to be very demanding...a turn off for sure...
 
Tim the plumber said:

Your reply says that it would be at least extremely difficult, well we all know impossible, for you to show any clear, coherent argument you have ever posted here.

Your tactic of never being wrong by never actaully saying anything clearly or if you do denying it almost imediately makes it so.
Click to expand...
Your demand is ridiculous. Your reading of my reply to your ridiculous demand is ridiculous. Please harass someone else.

Namaste
 
Angel said:
Your demand is ridiculous. Your reading of my reply to your ridiculous demand is ridiculous. Please harass someone else.

Namaste
Click to expand...

My request is reasonable;

Cite a single clear coherent argument you have made.

It is easy to do for most of us. Very few are so evaisive so as to not have a position then justify and defend it.

How come you are unable to do so?
 
RAMOSS said:
That is meaningless when it comes to the argument. That has nothing to do with 'mind vs brain'. As such, it is red herring.

THe argument is not relevant to the issue at hand, so is either ignorant or dishonest.

And the whole 'pearl before swine' is just a passive aggressive way Christians call non-Christians pigs.
Click to expand...

You didn't like hearing your position refuted, so you resorted back to your list of fallacies that you hurl towards anything that you don't agree with...
 
gfm7175 said:
You didn't like hearing your position refuted, so you resorted back to your list of fallacies that you hurl towards anything that you don't agree with...
Click to expand...

Why, if you don't want to hear a list fo fallacies, use good arguments. You do know what a fallacy is?? a fallacy is a bad argument.

And, no, it doesn't refute my argument at all. A bunch of gobble gook doesn't do anything at all. All iit means is that the brain was trained to respond to the hindi rather than english.

It's like the same piece of hardware (a computer) can run different pieces of software. That's all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom