Your thoughts!?

[Mojo]

You said, in the same sentence, that "i listen to other peoples opinions and try to understand them" and that "religion is utter bollocks, no way round it until they prove god exists."

Basically.

That is not listening to other people or respecting their beliefs, that is calling it bollocks, but sugarcoating it with "But i understand why you believe your crap."

Kinda like saying, "You're stupid, but i understand why you are stupid."

What you said in your previous post, was a different matter altogether. It states how you feel/felt about the issue and what your conclusion was.

Are you deliberately trying to misunderstand?

Like I said thinking something is bollocks has no bearing on any understanding of why others don't. What's so hard to understand about that exactly?


Not quite my words "Kinda like saying, "You're stupid, but I understand why you are stupid."

Lets me re-phrase that "You're been brought up to believe in a lie, but I understand why you believe in that lie."

It kinda answers it self that way doesn't it.

 

[Ctuchik]

Kinda like saying, "You're stupid, but i understand why you are stupid."

or respecting the stupidity...

 

[old.Tohtori]

Are you deliberately trying to misunderstand?

Like I said thinking something is bollocks has no bearing on any understanding of why others don't. What's so hard to understand about that exactly?

I could ask you the same, are you just trying not to listen?

Imgormiel said it rather well, adn there's no problem in "Believe what you will, it is alright, and i'll stick to my own beliefs." But saying "I think your beliefs are utter bollocks, but i can see why you believe it." still sounds condescending.

You could say "I see and understand why you believe and i'm not saying it's utter bull, just that i don't share this view." and there would be no hazzle.

You're trying to defend a point i'm not even trying to say is wrong.

or respecting the stupidity...

Exactly. It's a rather sugarcoaty way of calling someone stupid, with the backdoor there if they get angry. Still means you call them stupid.

 

[Mojo]

Imgormiel said it rather well, adn there's no problem in "Believe what you will, it is alright, and i'll stick to my own beliefs." But saying "I think your beliefs are utter bollocks, but i can see why you believe it." still sounds condescending.

It it no different to telling an anorexic she is skinny, understanding she has an illness and can't help and doesn't see it, doesn't change the fact that she is skinny does it?

 

[old.Tohtori]

It it no different to telling an anorexic she is skinny, understanding she has an illness and can't help and doesn't see it, doesn't change the fact that she is skinny does it?

...it's not about that. Ofcourse people believe in what they will and one non-believer won't change any persons mind any more then a believer will change a non-believers mind.

It's about delivering your own beliefs in a manner that doesn't involve insulting others or calling their beliefs dumb/stupid/bollocks.

Look, if i came to you and said "You can believe in science all you want, i get that some people can't help but to live a lie, but it's utter bollocks just so you know.", you're telling me that you'd be fine with that delivery?

 

[Mojo]

...it's not about that. Ofcourse people believe in what they will and one non-believer won't change any persons mind any more then a believer will change a non-believers mind.

It's about delivering your own beliefs in a manner that doesn't involve insulting others or calling their beliefs dumb/stupid/bollocks.

Look, if i came to you and said "You can believe in science all you want, i get that some people can't help but to live a lie, but it's utter bollocks just so you know.", you're telling me that you'd be fine with that delivery?

lmao I never had you down for this kinda shit. One moment I'm closed minded, then you can't grasp that I can understand why people believe and now its "It's about delivering your own beliefs in a manner that doesn't involve insulting others or calling their beliefs dumb/stupid/bollocks"

Screw you man, at least I'm consistent

 

[old.Tohtori]

lmao I never had you down for this kinda shit. One moment I'm closed minded, then you can't grasp that I can understand why people believe and now its "It's about delivering your own beliefs in a manner that doesn't involve insulting others or calling their beliefs dumb/stupid/bollocks"

Screw you man, at least I'm consistent

*sigh*

The whole point, where this started, was about your delivery.

The closeminded thing, the rather condescending style, i was commenting that. NOT your beliefs or how you feel about things.

What happened after that, was me trying to explain to you this situation. Which for some reason is hard to understand/take in.

I NEVER said "you don't get other people!" or that "your views are closeminded", i said that what you said(and mroe how you said it) was close minded and it was a rather friendly way of saying "I'd suggest saying it like this."

Thanks for having the need to tell me "screw you". Really appreciate it every time.

 

[Jeremiah]

It it no different to telling an anorexic she is skinny, understanding she has an illness and can't help and doesn't see it, doesn't change the fact that she is skinny does it?

There is a difference.

"Skinny" is an objective truth, "Religion is rubbish" is a subjective truth. One can be proved, the other cannot.

When you said:

You're been brought up to believe in a lie, but I understand why you believe in that lie.

You are passing the fact you believe it to be a lie (which is subjective) as an objective truth. And thats where you are showing yourself to be closed minded, because you speak like its fact and therefore to believe otherwise is crazy. If you wanted to be open-minded, you should reword it: For example "In my opinon, what you believe in is a lie....".

 

[Chronictank]

There is a difference.

"Skinny" is an objective truth, "Religion is rubbish" is a subjective truth. One can be proved, the other cannot.

When you said:


You are passing the fact you believe it to be a lie (which is subjective) as an objective truth. And thats where you are showing yourself to be closed minded, because you speak like its fact and therefore to believe otherwise is crazy. If you wanted to be open-minded, you should reword it: For example "In my opinon, what you believe in is a lie....".

give the man a cigar

 

[tris-]

dont fall for it, jeremiah is trying to convert you to believe in jebus h christ

 

[Mojo]

You are passing the fact you believe it to be a lie (which is subjective) as an objective truth. And thats where you are showing yourself to be closed minded, because you speak like its fact and therefore to believe otherwise is crazy. If you wanted to be open-minded, you should reword it: For example "In my opinon, what you believe in is a lie....".

God it is a complete fabrication until proven otherwise, feel free to prove otherwise without putting the burden of proof back on to me.

The onus is on you, you have the floor, and I am all ears.

Prove there is a god and call me out on being closed minded.

Carry on.

 

[Mojo]

There is a difference.

"Skinny" is an objective truth, "Religion is rubbish" is a subjective truth. One can be proved, the other cannot.

But that has fuck all to do with the point I was trying to make it had fuck all to do with truth objective or subjective, the point i was trying was simply.

Although I believe that religion is rubbish, I understand why other believe in it

What is so fucking hard to Grasp about that without mis quoting me and dragging in point i was never trying to make exactly?

And why the fuck after all the nit picking and mis quoting and miss interpreting what I said has not one of you fucks actually asked me to clarify what I meant if it was so fucking confusing and hard for you to understand?

The most frustrating point about these discussion is rather than sticking to the points and actually trying to make a decent counter argument all I get is maybe I should use " I believe" instead of XXXX or maybe i could me more polite instead of calling it bollocks.

Why don't you use some of your time and fucking brain power working on a counter argument rather than wasting it on how I deliver mine?

 

[Mojo]

T
You are passing the fact you believe it to be a lie (which is subjective) as an objective truth. And thats where you are showing yourself to be closed minded, because you speak like its fact and therefore to believe otherwise is crazy. If you wanted to be open-minded, you should reword it: For example "In my opinon, what you believe in is a lie....".

And I'm a closed minded because I don't believe in something that no one has ever been able to prove and that there is overwhelming evidence against. Even though I have stated that if the evidence presents itself I will quite happily change my mind

Yeah fucking good one, how the hell do you figure that one exactly?

 

[old.Tohtori]

Why it dragged along was because i was too polite to say "Stop being a brick and calling other peoples beliefs bollocks" and offered some advice on how to bring a more polite spin on your statement.

It wasn't the point you were making that i was discussing either. But you took it AS IF i was talking about your point and then turned it around saying i don't understand, when infact, you were the initial one to misunderstand and drag a completely simple advice into something larger then life. You didn't even listen when i said "It's not the point", when you thought i accused your point of view, but kept on defending your point. Which, never was attacked.

Why is it so hard to understand, no, why is it so hard to accept you may be in the wrong about that?

 

[Case]

Chill guys no need to get all het up!

Religion is based on faith
Science is based on fact

You cannot prove there is a god in the same way you cannot prove there is not therefore there is a chance that there is a higher being directing all things, which leads into the faith side of things.

The problem with creationism is that it cannot be proven and has actually been disproved by factual science. We see the results of evolution everyday, cats that have evolved to hunt at night, dogs that have evolved to hunt be scent ect ect. Where is the proof for creationism? Books and texts written by human beings hundreds or thousands of years ago with no basis in fact.

If I said to you that humans are evolved from robots who came to earth 10000 years ago you would tell me I'm an idiot. Yet when people say humans were created by god and appeared on earth fully formed and ready to rock discounting all evidence to the contrary (evolution of apes ect) people agree it must be true...

Both statements could be true but can easily be disproved so why believe one over the other?

 

[tris-]

You cannot prove there is a god in the same way you cannot prove there is not therefore there is a chance that there is a higher being directing all things, which leads into the faith side of things.

on the off chance, anyone have an 'official' probability on this? by official, i mean come to by scientists

 

[Mojo]

Why it dragged along was because i was too polite to say "Stop being a brick and calling other peoples beliefs bollocks" and offered some advice on how to bring a more polite spin on your statement.

If people cannot deal with me using the word bollocks instead of nonsense well that's just tough really. They can complain to the Mods or some such if they feel I have broken the forum rules. I will use whatever language I feel like at the time that's my right, it's not for you or anyone else to decide.

 

[old.Tohtori]

If people cannot deal with me using the word bollocks instead of nonsense well that's just tough really. They can complain to the Mods or some such if they feel I have broken the forum rules. I will use whatever language I feel like at the time that's my right, it's not for you or anyone else to decide.

But, sadly, it's not about the word. Here's as simple an explanation i can give:

Argument went:
A: The tabby is orange.
B: The tabby is green!
A: The tabby IS orange.
B: No no, the tabby is green.
A: The tabby is orange and you're living a lie!
B: Why not keep that judgemental, bully like behaviour out?
A: But the tabby IS orange!!
B: I never disputed that, i said to keep those insulting/undermining comments to yourself.
A: The tabby being orange and peoples opinions are a different thing!

You saw what i said different. As an attack on your opinion. Which it wasn't.

If i thought that "Gods this guy is daft for thinking there's no higher being...", i'd still keep it to myself and say things like "Well i believe in gods etc etc"(like i have) and not try to bring "power" into my point with insults and undermining.

NOW, if you say "Well i'll call other peoples beliefs whatever i want", or would have said in the first place, i would've considered you an unthoughtful bastard and move along. It's your right to do so afterall.

 

[Mojo]

But, sadly, it's not about the word. Here's as simple an explanation i can give:

Argument went:
A: The tabby is orange.
B: The tabby is green!
A: The tabby IS orange.
B: No no, the tabby is green.
A: The tabby is orange and you're living a lie!
B: Why not keep that judgemental, bully like behaviour out?
A: But the tabby IS orange!!
B: I never disputed that, i said to keep those insulting/undermining comments to yourself.
A: The tabby being orange and peoples opinions are a different thing!

You saw what i said different. As an attack on your opinion. Which it wasn't.

If i thought that "Gods this guy is daft for thinking there's no higher being...", i'd still keep it to myself and say things like "Well i believe in gods etc etc"(like i have) and not try to bring "power" into my point with insults and undermining.

NOW, if you say "Well i'll call other peoples beliefs whatever i want", or would have said in the first place, i would've considered you an unthoughtful bastard and move along. It's your right to do so afterall.

Well that's not quite how it went at all, I made some good arguments and then use the word bollocks to describe something while making a pointed directly to you in a specific post. But you made it what you wanted and elaborated on it for some unknown reason.. I guess I will just cease to engage you in future.

 

[Chronictank]

If people cannot deal with me using the word bollocks instead of nonsense well that's just tough really. They can complain to the Mods or some such if they feel I have broken the forum rules. I will use whatever language I feel like at the time that's my right, it's not for you or anyone else to decide.

i think you missed his point :/

religion is bollocks in your opinion your statement isnt fact its an opinion.
Until you provide empirical evidence to the contrary your comment is nothing more than an opinion whereas you repeatedly states it as a matter of fact

And before you start the crap about how do you prove something that doesnt exist, doesnt exist.
There is points of reference, he whole point is that if the bible, qu'ran, torah etc etc etc, were written by a divine entity (i would suggest doing your study on the qu'ran being the "newest" of the traditonal 3) then they should have inaccuracies. If said inaccuracies can be proven then you have evidence to the contrary of god existing.

I could just as easily say science is bollocks, in Arabia scholars studied the qu'ran and then made observations and stated the world is round whereas scienctist in the west believed it is flat

There also is alot of stuff in there being proven even today, the easiest example being the universe;

Apologies to non-english speakes as its in old arabic, so is translated into old english

(God) subjected the sun and the moon: each one runs its course to an appointed term."

The Sun runs its course to a settled place. This is the decree of the All Mighty, the Full of Knowledge

Note: 'Settled place' is the translation of the word mustaqarr, the dervied translation for this word into modern english is "dwell in for a specific period in a certain place" or "running its course towards a place of its own"

Based on the above and observations they said that the sun is the center of our solar system, and all the planets revolve around it. Now this could have been derived through observational science over a number of years, however;

"The heaven, We have built it with power. Verily. We are expanding it."

again old english so some words need explaining,
Heaven in the context of the quote is a translation of the word "sama", which in modern english is extra-terrestrial world.
'We are expanding it' is the translation of the plural present participle musi'una of the verb ausa'a meaning 'to make wider, more spacious, to extend, to expand'.

This wasnt proven until 1929 by Edwin Hubble

There is more but its pointless bringing it up for sake of illustration as you get where i am coming from , a google search will no doubt bring you to it.
Now you could put it down to a lucky guess, but then there is alot more which is accurate according to todays science. Some of which goes beyond what we know such as the size of the universe

"Have you not seen how God has created seven skies one above the other?"

"……if you can penetrate through the zones of the skies and the earth, then penetrate, you will not do so without authority."

"And we have decorated the lowest heaven (universe) with lanterns (stars)."

Cut down quote from Prof. Salamawy, Science and the Qu'ran

if we quote the previous verse which clearly states that all the lanterns (stars) are to be found in the lowest universe, we can quickly dismiss the previous interpretation. If the lowest universe includes within it all the stars and galaxies that we know, then the next universe must lie outside the comprehension of mankind

 

[old.Tohtori]

Well that's not quite how it went at all, I made some good arguments and then use the word bollocks to describe something while making a pointed directly to you in a specific post. But you made it what you wanted and elaborated on it for some unknown reason.. I guess I will just cease to engage you in future.

Great cop-out "Well i don't think you're as intelligent as me! I won't play with you!" The truth is, you called religion bollocks, stupid, "a lie", and that's where the problem was.

I'm not even the only one who said, what i did. Jeremiah said it, in a more "intelligent" way, too. Your delivery on issues needs "finetuning", you're rude and very...well..yes, cold.

You're thinking of it STILL that i attacked your original train of thought or reasoning, which i didn't.

Look back, around page 5 or so, and you'll see.

 

[Mojo]

your statement isnt fact its an opinion, nothing more.

And who else's opinion would I be referring to exactly? Do I need to actually clarify that when I am talking its my opinion I am talking about? Yet again your nit picking at my choice of words without reading them or rather you are nit picking at other people interpretation of my words.

Because I am actually really getting fucking sick and tired of this now I have quoted myself below (correctly I might add) and highlighted some words that should leave no doubt as to who's opinion I was expressing or that was in fact an opinion.

OK look at it like this then.

I had an open mind and I listened to all the arguments. In the last few years I have not seen anything new in the pro god argument to expand my ideas on, I can therefore conclude that I have run out of information to digest in the pro god debate so I can therefore make my final conclusion (which i have done)

My conclusion, it's bollocks.

your statement isnt fact its an opinion, nothing more.

And I said otherwise where now?

 

[old.Tohtori]

Yes but Mojo if you read ANYTHING else what other people say, you'd notice that my answer to that was "It wasn't the point".

As i've been trying to explain to you.

Look, if i told you "You're living a lie, your beliefs are utter bollocks..but i do understand why you're dumb enough to believe it."

Doesn't make it any less of an insult, now does it?

And THAT was what i've been trying to tell you, a friendly saying of "Why not tone the insulting part a bit down".

But every time i do, you get more and mroe mad for some reason and defend the same point, that never was attacked, more and more.

 

[Mojo]

Yes but Mojo if you read ANYTHING else what other people say, you'd notice that my answer to that was "It wasn't the point".

As i've been trying to explain to you.

Look, if i told you "You're living a lie, your beliefs are utter bollocks..but i do understand why you're dumb enough to believe it."

Doesn't make it any less of an insult, now does it?

And THAT was what i've been trying to tell you, a friendly saying of "Why not tone the insulting part a bit down".

But every time i do, you get more and mroe mad for some reason and defend the same point, that never was attacked, more and more.

Yet again the living a lie quote was something you said that I re-phrased when you said that I was being contradictory by calling religion bollocks but yet understanding why people believe.

Read your posts you have don't nothing but misquote and twist over that last 2 pages, so much so that even other people are mis quoting me based on things you have said. Half the crap you quote I didn't even fucking say


We will take this latest quote as an example

Take this "You're living a lie, your beliefs are utter bollocks..but i do understand why you're dumb enough to believe it."

Where the fuck did I say anything remotely like this in that context exactly?

 

[echome]

ARGHHH ARGHHH!!! Just look what religion makes you do.... ARGHH!!!



- Make love not war.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Where the fuck did I say anything remotely like this in that context exactly?

You didn't, but did misunderstand and took it as "You said this!"

I said "What if i said that to you". Which you completely took as another attack towards you. Never answering ANYTHING i say, simply undermining and insulting me more and more.

What you've seen as "mis quoting" is me saying HOW your sayings sound and trying to explain to you a better way of expressing your views.

Lets me re-phrase that "You're been brought up to believe in a lie, but I understand why you believe in that lie."

It kinda answers it self that way doesn't it.

In the same line, (AND THIS IS HOW IT COMES FORTH!!! get it?), you call my life a lie, but try to sugarcoat it with "But i understand". Condescending right there.

Now, when you call my life a lie, there's only one reason for it; you want to make me realise i do live a lie and change, ergo, change my religion.

And that right there, isn't understanding(no matter how much you claim to have), but trying to change other peoples views.

EDIT: By the way, i've never misquoted you, i've used quote marks, as in, an example of a saying. Stop throwing accusations when they are not needed/accurate.

 

[Chronictank]

ARGHHH ARGHHH!!! Just look what religion makes you do.... ARGHH!!!



- Make love not war.

this is FH we created a war out of puppies and kittens, doing it over religion is childsplay :d

 

[old.Tohtori]

this is FH we created a war out of puppies and kittens, doing it over religion is childsplay :d

And i'm not even in war mode yet

 

[Mojo]

You didn't, but did misunderstand and took it as "You said this!"

I said "What if i said that to you". Which you completely took as another attack towards you. Never answering ANYTHING i say, simply undermining and insulting me more and more.

So if I never said it why would you ask how I would feel if it was said to me? how is that relevant in any way?

What you've seen as "mis quoting" is me saying HOW your sayings sound and trying to explain to you a better way of expressing your views.

How it sounds we don't need you translations of how its sounds, people can read it from me direct without your spin on it

In the same line, (AND THIS IS HOW IT COMES FORTH!!! get it?), you call my life a lie, but try to sugarcoat it with "But i understand". Condescending right there.

Now, when you call my life a lie, there's only one reason for it; you want to make me realise i do live a lie and change, ergo, change my religion.

Again that whole line was directed to you and was not part of the religious discussion, it was an example to counter something you said which again you have taken out of context and put some spin on, it was not said in any religious context it was quite simply a way of saying "this is how you can not believe in something but understand why others do", no more or less until you spun it.

And that right there, isn't understanding(no matter how much you claim to have), but trying to change other peoples views.

What exactly is my lack of understanding? explain to me what I am not understanding? cos again this make no sense.

EDIT: By the way, i've never misquoted you, i've used quote marks, as in, an example of a saying. Stop throwing accusations when they are not needed/accurate.

No your right, you actually just made stuff up completely.

 

[old.Tohtori]

So if I never said it why would you ask how I would feel if it was said to me? how is that relevant in any way?

It was how it sounded to ME, and ME is the person discussing this "insulting" tone with YOU.

How it sounds we don't need you translations of how its sounds, people can read it from me direct without your spin on it

Never put a spin on anything, this is again the same thing you THINK is happening and how YOU read it. In the same way as i'm not telling OTHER people how to read things, but am telling you how it sounds to ME.

Again that whole line was directed to you and was not part of the religious discussion, it was an example to counter something you said which again you have taken out of context and put some spin on, it was not said in any religious context it was quite simply a way of saying "this is how you can not believe in something but understand why others do", no more or less until you spun it.

Again, it was meant towards ME, so I answered about it to YOU. YES(finally), it had nothing to do with religion, but your way of saying things.

Also, about how you call MY beliefs a lie. Which is an insult. Towards ME.

What exactly is my lack of understanding? explain to me what I am not understanding? cos again this make no sense.

Never said "lack of understanding", i said "It's not understanding". The "lack of understanding" if you want to say it as such, comes from you trying to change my views on my life by telling me it's bollocks and a lie, which you don't HAVE TO do in a discussion, unless you want to be a brick.

No your right, you actually just made stuff up completely.

So you just want to make you accusation even MORE non-accurate, instead of MAYBE...MAYBE, accepting something. You ismply misunderstood again what i said. Or didn't listen, whichever you prefer to ignore.

I'm NOT trying to make other people see anything.
I'm NOT discussing that your point is wrong.
I AM saying, you're delivery is cold and rather self clashing.
I AM saying, you don't NEED to use that kind of tone.