Philosophy Now Forum

attofishpi wrote:

sthitapragya wrote:I think this clarification is overdue. You have to realize that when we compare God to santa we are not claiming they are both the same thing.

Ah, thats a relief. You really would be a standing fool to think them otherwise.

sthitapragya wrote:We know God is unknowable. Most of us understand and know the concept of God as the unknown and unknowable.

Really - whatever gave you the idea that God is unknowable? I've known God exists since 1997.

sthitapragya wrote:We know God is supposed to transcend time and space

Really? How?

sthitapragya wrote:..that he is supposed to be omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent.

Well done then. From my experience 'it' pretty much is.

sthitapragya wrote:So we know that there is no comparison between God and Santa who live lives on the north pole and delivers gifts to kids.

So you are a bunch of raving fuckwits then?

sthitapragya wrote:When we refer to santa, we are simply trying to impress upon Theists that our ABSENCE OF BELIEF IN GOD AND SANTA IS THE SAME AS YOUR ABSENCE OF BELIEF IN SANTA.

No. Lets get this straight - NO adult with a grain of intelligence believes in a man that delivers presents to billions of children on a flying sledge.

sthitapragya wrote:Now whether our absence of belief is right or wrong, is up for debate.

In the case of God or santa? Cos lets face it - if you atheists are suggesting there is rationale in santas existence then you really are dumb fucks.

sthitapragya wrote:You might not like the fact that our absence of belief in God is the same as our absence of belief in santa even though there is no comparison between the two.

Ah!! So you ARE admitting to being dumb fucks!

sthitapragya wrote:You might be right in believing in God and we might be wrong in our absence of belief. But the fact is that our absence of belief in God is as complete as your absence of belief in santa.

No...again you need to understand its OUR - both atheists and theists that can agree there is no reason to believe in santa - you idiot.

sthitapragya wrote:For you to understand our absence of belief in God, the santa reference is made. There is no other way to get this point through to you. No disrespect is meant to the concept of God. We understand that the two cannot be compared.

So you agree you are an idiot for making the comparison?

sthitapragya wrote:I hope this explanation is satisfactory so that some Theists can get off our backs and try to explain to us what we believe. We don't. Period.

Extremely satisfactory...you are AN IDIOT.

. I like the honest expression of impotent rage. Though I have no idea why it bothers you so much. Just out of curiosity, we're you frothing at the mouth when you were beating this out on the keyboard?

Oh and all the concepts I mentioned are the kind that other Theists believe in. So any questions you have will have to be directed at them. Unknowable God how? Ask them. God transcends time and space? Ask Nick. I am simply saying that any of these ridiculous forms of God, we don't believe in. You don't seem to believe some of them either. So whatever form you believe in, if you explain, I will tell you how we don't believe in him either.

But it would be easier if you guys held a conclave, came to a conclusion about the god you all believe in so that we can explain we don't believe in him either so that this can end once and for all.

. Sorry, but I think it's hilarious how angry you got. And I have no idea what bothered you so much.

You obviously cant address YOUR points - point for point as i did as it renders you an IDIOT, and save your smileys for your idiotic clownface.

attofishpi wrote:You obviously cant address YOUR points - point for point as i did as it renders you an IDIOT, and save your smileys for your idiotic clownface.

Oh, come on. You are lawyering up now. Point for point you were mostly just insulting me. I had no reason to reply to them. You asked me two questions. I answered both. The rest of your "points" were just raging rants. And I am an idiot. I smoke. But I don't have an idiotic clown face, sorry. I am a handsome man (by Indian standards of course, which isn't saying much). But my absence of belief in God is the same as my absence of belief in Santa. I just hope I got that point across to you. It's important as you are a very important client.

And I find it hilarious that I am discussing God with a dog. If anyone thinks this is philosophy, this conversation should convince them that it is not.

attofishpi wrote:You obviously cant address YOUR points - point for point as i did as it renders you an IDIOT, and save your smileys for your idiotic clownface.

Did God tell you to say that?

Spot on, atto.

It's a garbage thread.

Walker wrote:Spot on, atto.

It's a garbage thread.

DO you believe in Santa, God, or both?

What justifies you belief, disbelief in one either or both?

You’re parking in garbage. Park it somewhere else.

Walker wrote:You’re parking in garbage. Park it somewhere else.

So you don't know the answer, but are mired in trash.

e.g.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Walker wrote:You’re parking in garbage. Park it somewhere else.

So you don't know the answer, but are mired in trash.

Walker wrote:e.g.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Walker wrote:You’re parking in garbage. Park it somewhere else.

So you don't know the answer, but are mired in trash.

Yes, I know you are trash, but I'm giving you an opportunity to join the clean people on the Forum. So drag your raggedy arse out of the shit, and out into the light.

Walker wrote:Spot on, atto.

It's a garbage thread.

And why are you sitting around in garbage? Looking for food, little chihuahua?

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Walker wrote:You’re parking in garbage. Park it somewhere else.

So you don't know the answer, but are mired in trash.

Walker never gives reasons or enters into a debate. He just throws general insults in the direction of atheists. That, according to him, is philosophy. Show me a single post where Walker has actually explained why he does not agree with someone. You have a better chance of seeing God.

With regards to the first post: you don’t get it. The comparison is invalid. It's like a fish comparing the water in which it swims to the idea of water.

I still wonder what the few Theists who responded got so angry about. I basically told them that atheists do not compare santa to God. It is just that our disbelief of both is the same. Even atheists understand that God and santa are not the same and cannot be compared. So what was so offensive about this explanation?

Theists tend to attribute an emotional component to the atheists disbelief (and there are also references towards some insecurity which I cannot understand) because there is an emotional component to the Theist's belief in God. However, there is no emotional component to the Theist's disbelief in santa. All I am trying to say is that to understand the atheist's disbelief in God, Theists should just look at their own disbelief in santa. Atheists feel the same way about God.

It does not mean we are right in our disbelief. We could be wrong. That is a matter of debate.

If you disbelieve, you disbelieve. So what? Why deliberately provoke people who do believe by insisting an an invalid comparison? Why throw eggs on a person's home? Isn't that called "trolling"?