Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Edgarcito

Evidence Types

Recommended Posts

On 11/28/2019 at 4:53 AM, Edgarcito said:

Kind of a good point here actually.....back to the number line analogy.... that we keep trying to move towards life/eternal life.  Yes, people find ways around actually helping, caring.  But the interesting thing is they keep coming to the door to try.  "I need to be a better person/ I want to be a better person"....maybe doing a few things to move to a higher number but then failing and falling back to a lower number...possibly regressing even further. 

 

Evidence pointing towards a religion and subsequent God that's congruent with this condition....spiritually and physically btw.  Does this evidence count?  Do you have an analytical method for this obvious observation/reality/truth? 

 

I was pointing out difference between you and TruthSeeker0, Endgarcito3.

 

He realized that his faith was making him into an immoral and unsympathetic person.

 

You appear to have realized nothing similar about yourself.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/28/2019 at 5:14 AM, Edgarcito said:

Regarding number one....how could God be something we could actually understand....  (end of number one). 

 

Endgarcito, the belief that God is something that we could not understand is YOUR belief.

 

YOUR beliefs play no part in the types of evidence that non-believers find acceptable.

 

That is what you asked for and that is what you have been given.

 

But, you persist in shifting the goalposts to what YOU believe.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/28/2019 at 3:21 PM, Edgarcito said:

No, my point is that a God should be both understandable and not.....we should not be able to comprehend God on some level.....yes on the level of our subjection, but no on a God level.  What amazes me is most everyone here says or rather demands some sort of evidence and certainty on their level.  Was Jesus not sufficient?  Did Jesus not meet this demand for humanity??  Did God miss the answer for this inquiry?

 

Once again, YOUR point plays no part in the remit you asked for - what non-believers find acceptable as evidence.

 

You shouldn't be amazed at the sort of evidence is being demanded in this thread.

 

This is what YOU asked for.

 

But, you've shifted the goalposts to what YOU think and believe.

 

The RedneckProf asked you to stay within the remit of the thread.

"Well, technically, you limited the evidence types to just those which non-believers would accept.  I'm simply asking you to stay on point with your own topic."

 

Please do so.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/28/2019 at 4:29 PM, sdelsolray said:

 

The first moving of the goalposts, with more to come.

 

I've been working through the posts and have only just come upon this one.

 

So, sdelsolray and I reached the same conclusion about Endgarcito3.

 

He set up this thread to be about what evidence is acceptable to non-believers.

 

Not what about he thinks or believes.

 

Not what his definitions or interpretations are.

 

He has shifted the goalposts.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, TruthSeeker0 said:

Yes I do. It's sad that it took 36 years of indoctrination for me to realize what was wrong with myself and how incredibly selfish and self centered my faith made me. It's also sad that it took my own suffering/adversity and having to face my own mortality to wake me up.

I hear the comments from people in the church that I used to belong to now, and the sheer amount of hubris and indifference to the suffering and challenges of others astounds me. But that's how it goes, when they believe that "gods blessings" such as health and prosperity, only belong to the True Believers.™️

 

Thank you for answering this, TruthSeeker0.

 

Btw, do you think Endgarcito3 has shifted the goalposts of this thread?

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Walter,

 

You read the first page of responses?  Non believers pretty much limit themselves to one type of evidence....material/real.  Have been here for years Walter....we argue for the hell of it....I'm an antagonist...  If you would like to teach formal debate.....go do it over there -----------> Blessings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/28/2019 at 4:24 AM, Edgarcito said:

What choice do you have.  You have essentially limited evidence types and therefore belief.....key word limited.  Go for it.  Per past discussions, do you think we should just use a supercomputer in lieu of a jury? 

 

Yes, of course the evidence types are limited,  Endgarcito3.

 

And the belief too.

 

That's because you asked non-believers what types of evidence they find acceptable.

 

Now, please confine yourself to presenting evidence within the non-believers remit.

 

Please stop shifting the goalposts from that to a different remit.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Edgarcito said:

Walter,

 

You read the first page of responses?  Non believers pretty much limit themselves to one type of evidence....material/real.  Have been here for years Walter....we argue for the hell of it....I'm an antagonist...  If you would like to teach formal debate.....go do it over there -----------> Blessings.

 

Endgarcito3,

 

You wrote what this thread was going to be about?

 

If you won't stay within the remit YOU set down, then you are shifting the goalposts.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, a simple question, E3.

 

Are you going to stay within the types of evidence that non-believers find acceptable.

 

Y / N ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's something for you to consider, Endgarcito3.

 

Subverting/Undermining the forum Mission (added December 31, 2013)

The purpose of this forum is to provide a civil, informative, respectful and welcoming environment where people of diverse perspectives can discuss, compare and debate. Posts while debating and discussing different perspectives must be done in the spirit of productivity. If a person's main goal is to undermine a different perspective by creating unproductive posts/threads/responses to others, etc., then those posts may be edited or removed and subject to moderation.

 

If you won't abide by the wording of the thread you set up, the Moderators might rule that you've deliberately made this into AN UNPRODUCTIVE THREAD.

 

So, to repeat my easy-to-answer question.

 

Are you going to stay within the evidence types that non-believers find acceptable?

 

Y / N ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's getting late here and I'll be logging off after this.

 

 

 

Lion's Den Rules

Attention "True Christians™" and former Christians.

This is the section of the board where Christian opinions, arguments, sermons and so on will be more-or-less tolerated. Aggressive evangelism is permitted in this section, but aggressive evangelists should be ready to be met by equally aggressive resistance.

An occasionally heated response is allowed and sometimes even encouraged. However, all posters to the Lion's Den are still expected to adhere the general rules of decorum as delineated in the Forum Guidelines. In other words, conversations in the Lion's Den are intended to be permissively unrestrained without devolving into repetitious verbal abuse. Those who are identified as repeatedly abusive -- in this section or any section of this website -- may be suspended or banned from posting without notice.

Note: In view of the fiery nature of the discussions which occur in the Lion's Den, only those with a fairly thick skin should participate.

 

 

Endgarcito3 cannot claim that his steadfast refusal to abide the conditions he set down for his own thread is an occasional heated response.

 

Nor can he claim that the fiery nature of the discussions in the Lion's Den covers his steadfast refusal to abide by his own words.

 

His refusal is a deliberate and carefully considered action, made to avoid the consequences of his own words.

 

As such, he has made this thread unproductive from get go.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Walter, it’s the consensus opinion here that Christians aren’t mentally all there.... You are arguing otherwise.  Get with the program man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

Walter, it’s the consensus opinion here that Christians aren’t mentally all there.... You are arguing otherwise.  Get with the program man.

 

This would be a dull place without a Christian to argue with. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

Walter, it’s the consensus opinion here that Christians aren’t mentally all there.... You are arguing otherwise.  Get with the program man.

That's all you have to say, really? Why not answer the question he's asking you. Are you going to stay within the types of evidence that non believers find acceptable? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

Walter,

 

You read the first page of responses?  Non believers pretty much limit themselves to one type of evidence....material/real.  Have been here for years Walter....we argue for the hell of it....I'm an antagonist...  If you would like to teach formal debate.....go do it over there -----------> Blessings.

 

 

What specifically is your evidence of Jesus? Whatever 'type' it is, lay it on us, sir. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

we argue for the hell of it....I'm an antagonist...

 

Why does anyone argue with someone like this?  Trying to fathom it . . . this “unproductive thread” could have been over about 8 pages ago.  He asked, we answered.  It takes two to argue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

Walter, it’s the consensus opinion here that Christians aren’t mentally all there.... You are arguing otherwise.  Get with the program man.

 

Endgarcito3,

 

That's right.  I'm arguing otherwise.  Instead of writing you off as mentally challenged, I'm standing up for your mental prowess.

 

Deliberate antagonism (which you admitted to yesterday) isn't something a mentally challenged person can aspire to.

 

Nor does such a person have the mental capacity to argue... just for the hell of it (your own words).

 

In both cases the person is using their mental powers to deliberately disrupt the very purpose of this forum.

 

The purpose of this forum is to provide a civil, informative, respectful and welcoming environment where people of diverse perspectives can discuss, compare and debate. 

 

When asked End3 said that he treated Ex-C as a kind of therapy where he dealt with his anger issues towards his father.

 

End3 has mutated into Edgarcito and now goes further, taking a perverse delight in jerking us all around.

 

There's nothing wrong with your brain - you're just using it to **** this forum up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, WalterP said:

End3 has mutated into Edgarcito and now goes further, taking a perverse delight in jerking us all around.

 

In other words, trolling.

 

        \|||/
        (o o)
.----ooO--(_)-------.
| Please            |          
|   don't feed the  |
|     TROLLS!       |
'--------------Ooo--'
       |__|__|
        || ||
       ooO Ooo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, TEG said:

 

Why does anyone argue with someone like this?  Trying to fathom it . . . this “unproductive thread” could have been over about 8 pages ago.  He asked, we answered.  It takes two to argue.

Jhn 4:24

Unchecked Copy BoxJhn 4:24 - God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.”
 
From my standpoint either we should be looking for an analytical method that measures Spirit or looking at evidence that points to Spirit. 
 
Right back at you TEG....wondering why we have pages of people looking for material evidence.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, WalterP said:

 

Endgarcito3,

 

That's right.  I'm arguing otherwise.  Instead of writing you off as mentally challenged, I'm standing up for your mental prowess.

 

Deliberate antagonism (which you admitted to yesterday) isn't something a mentally challenged person can aspire to.

 

Nor does such a person have the mental capacity to argue... just for the hell of it (your own words).

 

In both cases the person is using their mental powers to deliberately disrupt the very purpose of this forum.

 

The purpose of this forum is to provide a civil, informative, respectful and welcoming environment where people of diverse perspectives can discuss, compare and debate. 

 

When asked End3 said that he treated Ex-C as a kind of therapy where he dealt with his anger issues towards his father.

 

End3 has mutated into Edgarcito and now goes further, taking a perverse delight in jerking us all around.

 

There's nothing wrong with your brain - you're just using it to **** this forum up.

Walter....I'm not perverse buddy.  I'm going off of memory.  I haven't cracked the Bible nor been to church in years.  I'd destroy you if I were up to speed.  And Dad died of dementia.  My brain is leaning that way....slow on days without major doses of caffeine.  I don't like to discuss when it feels slow.  Take a chill pill sir.  You are much like our old buddy BAA as you demand shit happen in a certain order and way.  It's just a conversation. 

 

I don't dislike any of you.  I am here because I actually like you.  Do y'all understand this?  You have brains.  I like to discuss with people with intelligence.  If you think I am trying to jack people around or hurt more feelings, I have NO interest in that.  None.  I don't know any of you nor care unless you are headed to West Texas with beer.  Discuss if you so desire......don't if you don't.

 

PSA brought to you in part by Serta Perfect Sleeper.....GOOD DAY!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, TEG said:

 

In other words, trolling.

 

        \|||/
        (o o)
.----ooO--(_)-------.
| Please            |          
|   don't feed the  |
|     TROLLS!       |
'--------------Ooo--'
       |__|__|
        || ||
       ooO Ooo

Very talented btw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I said . . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, TEG said:

Like I said . . . .

See the problem is outside of M, few respond to my reasonably serious response.  The one about the spirit TEG.  Go there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Edgarcito said:

From my standpoint either we should be looking for an analytical method that measures Spirit or looking at evidence that points to Spirit. 

We agree.  Show us evidence that points to the spirit; but remember to keep said evidence within the limits you set down (to wit: what we accept as evidence).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That’s my point... it makes no sense to use the evidence type selected by non believers.  We don’t use a material analysis method when we aren’t looking for a material.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.