On Apr 9, 2019, TomBoleware wrote:
Ron. What proof would you need for you to become a believer?

On Apr 9, 2019, S2000magician wrote:

Quote:

On Apr 9, 2019, TomBoleware wrote:
Ron. What proof would you need for you to become a believer?

If I recall correctly from many, many other discussions, he doesn't know.

Please, Ron, correct me if I've misstated your position. I don't want to put words in your mouth.

On Apr 9, 2019, magicfish wrote:
R.S. wrote :"So wouldn’t it be easier for you to just explain what YOU mean when YOU use the words? 
No. I believe the word 'set' has the most definitions of any word in the English language. But when someone uses it in context, I don't need to ask them which of the dozens of definitions they are applying.
Same with Faith and Divine and Science .
I could ask you a hundred times what YOUR definition of science is. But I won't because 1. I'm not an idiot
2. I couldn't care less what YOUR definition of science is because science is science. I know what the word means. I learned it in primary school as a child. Just like Faith, Divine, Hemoglobin, Set, Pillar, Oblong, Frigate, Apple, Envy, Moisture, Nuance, etc.

On Mar 27, 2019, karnak wrote:
...And the Big Bang certainly wasn't "nothing exploding," as it's sometimes wrongly made out to be. There was certainly "something" -- the pre-existing, pre-Big Bang "singularity" -- which inflated to give birth to the universe and everything in it (including not just matter and energy, but also spacetime itself).

(Hmmmm. Wonder if there might be some patter possibilities here, for something like a "Quantum Cups and Balls" routine?)

On Apr 9, 2019, S2000magician wrote:

Quote:

On Apr 9, 2019, R.S. wrote:

Quote:

On Apr 8, 2019, S2000magician wrote:

Quote:

On Apr 8, 2019, R.S. wrote:

Quote:

On Apr 8, 2019, S2000magician wrote:

Quote:

On Apr 8, 2019, Dannydoyle wrote:
Ron maybe IF you wanted to actually discuss and learn instead of try to teach it is possible people might entertain answering your questions. But that would involve you admitting you have something to learn, which we all know isn't going to happen.

Ron's agenda, as far as I have been able to determine, is to discredit religious beliefs.

To his credit, he has been pretty open in that objective.

Actually, my aim is to QUESTION religious beliefs.

That being said, are there any religious beliefs you don't believe should be discredited?

Probably. Depends what the belief is. But I also think that there most definitely are some that should be discredited. And there may be yet others that should neither be immediately endorsed nor discredited, but perhaps explored more.

So again, do you think there are any religious beliefs worth discrediting?

Probably. Depends on what the belief is. I haven't considered them all.

On Apr 9, 2019, Dannydoyle wrote:
He IS a believer and one with religious fervor. Look at how he constantly proselytizees! Can't help himself as a matter of fact.

On Apr 9, 2019, TomBoleware wrote:
But Danny, he has no proof, and I’m curious why he believes what he does without any proof when he seems to demand that others provide proof.

So Ron, what proof would it take for you to believe in God?

Tom

On Apr 9, 2019, S2000magician wrote:

Quote:

On Apr 9, 2019, TomBoleware wrote:
Ron. What proof would you need for you to become a believer?

If I recall correctly from many, many other discussions, he doesn't know.

Please, Ron, correct me if I've misstated your position. I don't want to put words in your mouth.

On Apr 9, 2019, Dannydoyle wrote:

Quote:

On Apr 9, 2019, S2000magician wrote:

Quote:

On Apr 9, 2019, TomBoleware wrote:
Ron. What proof would you need for you to become a believer?

If I recall correctly from many, many other discussions, he doesn't know.

Please, Ron, correct me if I've misstated your position. I don't want to put words in your mouth.

And isn't not knowing very convenient for him? He never have to worry about proof actually showing up or really listening to anyone or their position. He can immediately set about an interrogation to PROVE to them that they are mistaken. He can constantly question everyone else and try to teach them they are wrong without ever examining any of his own beliefs.

He has it pretty down pat.

On Apr 9, 2019, TomBoleware wrote:
I just can’t understand how he can put so much faith into something that he admits he doesn’t know is true or not.

I’m a believer because I believe it to be true. Ron is a believer because he doesn’t know.

That’s sort of weird ain’t it?

Perhaps he just ‘refuses’ to believe anything else. Is that it Ron?

Tom