Philosophy Now Forum

attofishpi wrote: ↑Thu Mar 06, 2025 12:48 am ...U atheists that think there is zero evidence of GOD..are fuckin dooooopid.

Wakey wakey Brian, it's not atheists who say there is no evidence for God, that'll be yer agnostics. Atheists such as yours truly accept that there is evidence for all sorts of gods, we just don't think it is sufficiently compelling to commit to a belief in any given God.

Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Thu Mar 06, 2025 1:27 am

attofishpi wrote: ↑Thu Mar 06, 2025 12:48 am ...U atheists that think there is zero evidence of GOD..are fuckin dooooopid.

Wakey wakey Brian, it's not atheists who say there is no evidence for God, that'll be yer agnostics. Atheists such as yours truly accept that there is evidence for all sorts of gods, we just don't think it is sufficiently compelling to commit to a belief in any given God.

Wakey wakey? Prey, wot do u think I need to wake up to?

Every 1 that doesn't have gnosis is a flavour of 'agnostic'. You've stated in the past that u r agnostic, thus atheist agnostic. I find that rather intellectually disturbing

There are more definitions of the term agnosticism than there are man's folly over imaginations gods.

I do_u_BT you've watched the Shroud of Turin video in it's entirety, am I correct that you haven't? : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YT1R2kDPHFA&t=0s

Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Thu Mar 06, 2025 1:27 am

attofishpi wrote: ↑Thu Mar 06, 2025 12:48 am ...U atheists that think there is zero evidence of GOD..are fuckin dooooopid.

Wakey wakey Brian, it's not atheists who say there is no evidence for God, that'll be yer agnostics. Atheists such as yours truly accept that there is evidence for all sorts of gods, we just don't think it is sufficiently compelling to commit to a belief in any given God.

Out of curiosity what does the word 'atheist' even mean or is referring to, to you, EXACTLY?

attofishpi wrote: ↑Thu Mar 06, 2025 12:48 am My GOD, I love Jesus the Christ.

..and U atheists that think there is zero evidence of GOD..are fuckin dooooopid.,

So, because 'this one' LOVES some thing, then ANY one who has NOT YET seen or experienced ANY 'evidence' for what 'this one' LOVES, (but which is NOT YET ABLE TO PROVIDE ANY PROOF FOR), then ALL of 'those ones' ARE NOT JUST STUPID, BUT FUCKING STUPID. Well to 'this one' anyway.

Which SHOWS and PROVES just HOW STUPID people can REALLY BE, while they are HOLDING and HAVING A BELIEF.

attofishpi wrote: ↑Thu Mar 06, 2025 2:14 am

Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Thu Mar 06, 2025 1:27 am

attofishpi wrote: ↑Thu Mar 06, 2025 12:48 am ...U atheists that think there is zero evidence of GOD..are fuckin dooooopid.

Wakey wakey Brian, it's not atheists who say there is no evidence for God, that'll be yer agnostics. Atheists such as yours truly accept that there is evidence for all sorts of gods, we just don't think it is sufficiently compelling to commit to a belief in any given God.

Wakey wakey? Prey, wot do u think I need to wake up to?

Every 1 that doesn't have gnosis is a flavour of 'agnostic'. You've stated in the past that u r agnostic, thus atheist agnostic. I find that rather intellectually disturbing

There are more definitions of the term agnosticism than there are man's folly over imaginations gods.

I do_u_BT you've watched the Shroud of Turin video in it's entirety, am I correct that you haven't? : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YT1R2kDPHFA&t=0s

PRESUMING that 'that video' CONFIRMS your ALREADY OBTAINED PRE-EXISTING BELIEF, ABSOLUTELY TRUE, just SHOWS and PROVES the POWER OF BELIEF, and then consequently 'CONFIRMATION BIAS', itself. Even what IS, supposedly, 'CONFIRMED' may well BE ABSOLUTELY False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and/or Incorrect.

Go a way idiot.

Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Thu Mar 06, 2025 1:27 am Atheists such as yours truly accept that there is evidence for all sorts of gods, we just don't think it is sufficiently compelling to commit to a belief in any given God.

Actually Will, I think U R attempting to blow smoke up my arse re atheits. Atheists see no reasoning nor evidence of God(s).

So.

What of the scientific analysis of the Shroud of Turin does not compel U to comprehend any form of Divinity in its creation?

What of the gray scale information embedded?

attofishpi wrote: ↑Thu Mar 06, 2025 3:26 am
My GOD, I love Jesus the Christ.

The lover is the loved.

Beloved.

I tried to love my lover unconditionally, but he wasn’t having any of it, he craved conditions.

But “he” that dares not grasp the thorn, should never crave the rose.

attofishpi wrote: ↑Sat Mar 08, 2025 8:44 amWhat of the scientific analysis of the Shroud of Turin does not compel U to comprehend any form of Divinity in its creation?

Well, if the claim were that Jesus Christ was flat, I'd be more inclined to believe that a sheet placed on him could result in a perfect two dimensional image.

Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Sun Mar 09, 2025 1:21 am

attofishpi wrote: ↑Sat Mar 08, 2025 8:44 amWhat of the scientific analysis of the Shroud of Turin does not compel U to comprehend any form of Divinity in its creation?

Well, if the claim were that Jesus Christ was flat, I'd be more inclined to believe that a sheet placed on him could result in a perfect two dimensional image.

Will, you are clearly being short of sight on this. The image that appears to have been radiated upon the shroud isn't from the causal affect of there being a human within. That is what people would originally believe through the ages, but surely we can see through that?

The image having been formed via some apparent radiation effect has little to do with us considering that a human body could cause such a thing!

What do you think with regards to the fact that the image is akin to a photographic negative and the grayscale information embedded has enough detail for scientist to generate a 3 dimensional model of the body in rigor mortis (*using tech developed by NASA to map contours from 2D grayscale images of planetary bodies)?

Well introspected atto.

I’m beginning only recently, to be able to understand your unique particular style of syntax, when it comes to how you are describing your own personal description of God, through the lens of your own unique perception, as you see it.

Fairy wrote: ↑Sun Mar 09, 2025 10:54 am Well introspected atto.

I’m beginning only recently, to be able to understand your unique particular style of syntax, when it comes to how you are describing your own personal description of God, through the lens of your own unique perception, as you see it.

Well, thanks Fairy. It's nice to know I at least make some sense to someone on the forum.

I love Jesus Christ.

I am the bride of Christ.

I am alone with God, not Man.

attofishpi wrote: ↑Sun Mar 09, 2025 11:09 am

Fairy wrote: ↑Sun Mar 09, 2025 10:54 am Well introspected atto.

I’m beginning only recently, to be able to understand your unique particular style of syntax, when it comes to how you are describing your own personal description of God, through the lens of your own unique perception, as you see it.

Well, thanks Fairy. It's nice to know I at least make some sense to someone on the forum.

I agree with you that every decision is a binary decision.

I agree God exists.

I’m also beginning to understand what you are saying to others regarding the subject of God.