Sociopath Community

by Edvard

I am not an atheist, but I don't pretend logic has anything to do with it.

I don't get what you mean by that. If your a theist, then you should be able to apply logic to what you believe. If you can't fathom or relate to anything I wrote in particular, let me know.

 

You're just making these ridiculous posts where you "prove" God's existence with arrogance, like you have all the fucking obvious answers and everyone else is stupid for not seeing your way.

Nonesense. Often do I tell people they needn't just take my word for it. People need to look and decide for themselves. When I used the word obvious, I said it's obvious to me through study and experiences.

 

It's crap. A lot of smart people, with much better logic and knowledge than you, like most scientists for example, say that these old arguments can't be used to proove God's existence. If they could, we wouldn't be having this debate in the first place.

 

"Every one who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes
convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe-a spirit
vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we with
our modest powers must feel humble."

- Albert Einstein

 

You don't speak for God here, you're just following your own agenda and arrogance.

Agenda ? There is no reward in debating this here.

 

People like you make a diservice to God. When you reffered to yourself as "the man who speaks for God" it became obvious that all this is just about you holding some high moral ground. 

So it's wrong for one to set high morals now ? I think you're doing the Father the Son and yourself, a diservice.

 

You have your faith, I have mine, which is different than yours anyway. But that's just it, faith. If you claim otherwise you're just a fool making himself look stupid.

So Edvard. You have faith in the Lord, but when you see someone who is "convinced" of the reality of consciousness behind creation, that person is a fool making themself look stupid ?

 

And to clear up the rest of the shit. You said the pineal gland has cones and rods cells. I said "Really? That's cool", then A DOCTOR who actually studied the anatomy/cell thingies said that's simply not the case, and I believed her. It was fucking common sense.

 

Cones ? What's a cone ?

The Doctor posted some video of pineal gland activation. You said it was interesting, then she came back with "It's bullshit Edvard". There was no you saying to me "That's cool" cause at the time you were already acting all detached with me. It's not important though, I just brought it up to point something out.

You're amazing Edvard. Theist, joining Atheiest to debate with a theist, while you basically suggested one who has faith shouldn't apply logic cause there is none ?

by HelloTech

Mental disorders don't have anything to do with religion.  I find your assumptions about God and the people in this community interesting.

Do not misinterpret, I share your passion of knowledge and logic.  You have many valid points throughout this thread.  As a man of science, you fully understand how science is proven wrong each day.  As a man of logic, you are aware that small wins i.e. proving someone's religion, pales in comparison to your absolute trust, perhaps faith?, in logic and reason.

 I'm convinced. I don't operate on blindly going forward. That is the way of faith.

Not everyone will venture off and find their way, so faith is useful for religion. I know I sound conceited, but I left faith and religion long ago. The things I look into, the things I feel, the things I saw and experieced. 'I am convinced' there is a creator behind all of this. I Even have a new found respect for religion, but I still dislike religion. It's a twisted dull and boring thing, but I see it as nessary. Worked for my buddy Eddy over there.

So where does faith end and fact begin? For you?

Many things you'd call fact someone could just as easily call faith, with most arguements against you stemming based on your convictions treating it as if it were unerring fact as opposed to an educated possibility (or at least the appearance of this). Using words like "obvious" gives the impression that you don't see much chance of what you believe being possibly wrong.

I also fail to see how a theist arguing alongside atheists makes his words any less credible. He's arguing he follows what he believes on faith, without the pretense of calling it absolute truth, and then proceeds to attack your character as opposed to your beliefs themselves. For the beliefs themselves, he's mostly asking questions.

by Turncoat

So where does faith end and fact begin? For you?

 

I don't know how to answer that question.

Many things you'd call fact someone could just as easily call faith, with most arguements against you stemming based on your convictions treating it as if it were unerring fact as opposed to an educated possibility (or at least the appearance of this). Using words like "obvious" gives the impression that you don't see much chance of what you believe being possibly wrong.

 

Like I said, things strike me as obvious.

-Can't get something from nothing.

-Nothing will not design something.

I also fail to see how a theist arguing alongside atheists makes his words any less credible. He's arguing he follows what he believes on faith, without the pretense of calling it absolute truth, and then proceeds to attack your character as opposed to your beliefs themselves. For the beliefs themselves, he's mostly asking questions.

 He attacks my character during all seasons. No matter what I say or do.

He does not argue faith, he argues that I am some kind of monster with some kind of agenda, as if debating the existance of God againsts the lot takes me to a cozzy place.

He's being a hypocrite with his "It's okay to be a believer in God, but anyone who is convinced there is a God is out of line". I see and understand the sheep mentality and the importance of faith for some people, but damn.

I'm going to bed.

 Simply , because he can. 

"He's being a hypocrite with his "It's okay to be a believer in God, but anyone who is convinced there is a God is out of line"."

That's hypocritical? Believing in something means understanding you could be wrong, while being convinced means certainty.

Wouldn't that make it more of a question of measuring conviction?

Agenda ? There is no reward in debating this here.

Yeah there is. In your brain you are the Defender of God among the evil souless monsters. It's narcissistic food.

So it's wrong for one to set high morals now ? I think you're doing the Father the Son and yourself, a diservice.

No, it's wrong to come off like a righteous arrogant ass like you.

Albert Einstein quote

My argument is why isn't everyone convinced of the existence of God if it can be logically proven. Answer: it can't. It's still faith, and Einstein had his.

So Edvard. You have faith in the Lord, but when you see someone who is "convinced" of the reality of consciousness behind creation, that person is a fool making themself look stupid ?

No, I didn't attack you because of your belief in God. Of course I don't have a problem with that. I have a problem with how you pretend yur reasons are "logical" and "obvious", because they are not. Faith is faith, it isn't logical. The golden ratio says squat about God, people have had/ can have faith in Him even without knowing about golden ratio. You are trying to justify your faith by appealing to the intellect in an aggresive way, with misinformed facts and faulty logic. This does nothing but disgust the people who see the problem with your argumentation. People like you turn others away from God.

Cones ? What's a cone ?

Ignorant fucking narcs like you. If you don't know about cones and rods then fucking research them like you say you research your stupid stuff. This is proof you don't bother with research in general.

He's being a hypocrite with his "It's okay to be a believer in God,
but anyone who is convinced there is a God is out of line". I see and
understand the sheep mentality and the importance of faith for some
people, but damn.

Again, I don't have a problem with your convinction. Just stop pretending you can feed it logically to others by showing x rays or whatever.

by Edvard

Agenda ? There is no reward in debating this here.

Yeah there is. In your brain you are the Defender of God among the evil souless monsters. It's narcissistic food.

 

I never created this topic, and I shared a point of view. The rest is an ongoing questionare, and when asked I respond. I have been formal about it, while you and some others have not. You're spreading falsehoods again.

 

So it's wrong for one to set high morals now ? I think you're doing the Father the Son and yourself, a diservice.

No, it's wrong to come off like a righteous arrogant ass like you.

 

But Ed. I suggested people walk on their own and don't just take my word for it. Don't hate me for having something to say when questioned. Because I have something to say, where you would not, doesn't make me into what you feel I am.

 

Albert Einstein quote

My argument is why isn't everyone convinced of the existence of God if it can be logically proven. Answer: it can't. It's still faith, and Einstein had his.

 

I answered that one in my first post, and I wasn't even debating here. In short, people fear being ridiculed. It has to do with going against the herd.

 

So Edvard. You have faith in the Lord, but when you see someone who is "convinced" of the reality of consciousness behind creation, that person is a fool making themself look stupid ?

No, I didn't attack you because of your belief in God. Of course I don't have a problem with that. I have a problem with how you pretend yur reasons are "logical" and "obvious", because they are not. Faith is faith, it isn't logical. The golden ratio says squat about God, people have had/ can have faith in Him even without knowing about golden ratio. You are trying to justify your faith by appealing to the intellect in an aggresive way, with misinformed facts and faulty logic. This does nothing but disgust the people who see the problem with your argumentation. People like you turn others away from God.

 

Untrue like the rest of the claims you make about others.

The Golden ratio proves to me that this is not random. ( I say it proves to me, cause it doesn't prove anything to those who don't accept it, regardless of it's proven existance) If it were random, we would not see the same signatures in various lifeforms and physics. Deformation can exist, and it can function within it's degree, but that is what it is, while all creatures and plants and forces of nature repeat the same math. This is not randomness, but it is the work of consciousness.

If it were a game of dice, then the ratio would not uphold itself in nature. I'm sorry, but this is very basic and logical. People are comfortable with what they are told, but how many people can write formulas or make sense of them ?

It's but a language I'm sure, but still, people settle for it to a point where they will argue it, and ignore how these theories contradict themselves. Sure it makes me sound arrogant, ego's have nothing to say when I point that out, so I get the blame, while my suggestion is taken as 2 cents.

 

Cones ? What's a cone ?

Ignorant fucking narcs like you. If you don't know about cones and rods then fucking research them like you say you research your stupid stuff. This is proof you don't bother with research in general.

Very funny Edvard, you just said that I wrote about Cones and Rods, now your saying I don't know about it cause I'm ignorant. Well Ed, I questioned what is a Cone just to reveal how you make stuff up on the spot. I see what you do all the time, so I expose you again. Let's forget the bullshit and give credit to my correction on how much you follow Alia's lead at the expense of your own interests.

by Edvard

He's being a hypocrite with his "It's okay to be a believer in God,
but anyone who is convinced there is a God is out of line". I see and
understand the sheep mentality and the importance of faith for some
people, but damn.

Again, I don't have a problem with your convinction. Just stop pretending you can feed it logically to others by showing x rays or whatever.

 It's not important if it was an xray it's the ratio that matters, understand what you are being shown. The xray was showing the Golden Ratio in a finger. Showing it all at once all over the body doesn't sink in. I also showed the Phi caliper in action. Like I said people have to learn for themselves.

The numbers are there, the ratio is there. Yes it is logical Edvard. It is not a myth or superstition, it is aknowledged in nature, science, art, engineering, math, photography, CORRECT physics simulation, you name it, and the best of these fields use the Golden ratio in their work, that shit is real. It's amazing how throughout the entire Bible, God is the only one to bring it up, and he did it twice. 

No Edvard, I am not playing or pretending or making any of this up. As suggested, you have Alia's back no matter where she goes. You're like a lemming.

- Golden Ratio is real. It is not random dice. This is logical.

- God brought up the Golden Ratio twice in the Bible. Regardless of belief, it is interesting.

- We do not get something from nothing. We never have. This is common logic.

- Energy cannot be created or destroyed. It was not created when the universe was created. If it were, then rewrite the laws of physics and start to produce energy from 0. It's not happening. More logic, again, sorry. ( I never apologized for seeming arrogant the first time, I hope this works )

- All matter is a form of energy. 2 atoms make a molecule, and everything is made of atoms. Everything. This too is logical.

- Modern experiments reveal old theories to be impossible. This is happening a lot. HelloTech pointed this out as well. Over due logic.

- I don't believe millions of people fake experiencing hyper reality, when they come back after being pronounced clinically dead. I still do extensive research on this. Atheists become knowers. Multimillionares give it all away and become some kind of social worker or minister. Often do doctors and nurses express how they can sense some kind of force at work whenever people making amazing recoveries such as these near death experiences. People come back not afraid of death. They are often told they must return. The feelings are the same, with the exception of those who experience a purification of the soul. Case after case, even under hypnosis. I seek no answer from Christians trying to get people to convert. The fake stories all have a bias to it and easy to spot. There is no big prank when people come back from their death bed.

I have several other things I look into that "convince" me there really is a prime creator. We see these things each and everyday. All I can say is, it is unwise to struggle or fight other opinions. Go and venture into a world where you are prone to ridicule, and you'll learn and see things from the old and new point of view.

by Spatial Mind

The Golden ratio proves to me that this is not random. ( I say it proves to me, cause it doesn't prove anything to those who don't accept it, regardless of it's proven existance) If it were random, we would not see the same signatures in various lifeforms and physics. Deformation can exist, and it can function within it's degree, but that is what it is, while all creatures and plants and forces of nature repeat the same math. This is not randomness, but it is the work of consciousness. If it were a game of dice, then the ratio would not uphold itself in nature. I'm sorry, but this is very basic and logical. People are comfortable with what they are told, but how many people can write formulas or make sense of them ?

It's but a language I'm sure, but still, people settle for it to a point where they will argue it, and ignore how these theories contradict themselves. Sure it makes me sound arrogant, ego's have nothing to say when I point that out, so I get the blame, while my suggestion is taken as 2 cents.

Nobody denies the presence of the golden ratio, Spatial. All we argue is your inexplicable leap from a pattern seen in nature to conscious design and a prime creator. I understand if this is proof enough for you, but you can't go around and act like it naturally should be for everybody else. At the very least admit that you're making an 'educated guess' about this, instead of waving it in people's faces as if it would be indisputable mathematical evidence.

And by the way, you still haven't told me a good reason for why this 'game of dice' couldn't have been played once when the universe was created and then acted as a natural 'law' for it ever since. Much like the fixed speed of light.