Re: God helped Jerry Yang win WSOP!
 

I just finished reading it over my lunch hour. Very good read. Thanks!

Re: God helped Jerry Yang win WSOP!
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Because it's not meant to be a serious philosophical argument but a post hoc rationalization of why the world as it exists doesn't fit with their ideas about the fundamentally benevolent nature of their god.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well sure. I understand why people take this line, but it's important to hammer on why it's a worthless one to even consider. No need for Bible quotes or arguing through 5 pages of faith conflation on this one. Straight up reason vs. non-reason. So, what do theists have against reason?

[/ QUOTE ]

I only said it because it needed to be said openly.

Theists have this annoying habit of confusing complicated rationalization with compelling reason. It has come to a point where they can look at the huge body of "work" they've produced over the millennia and think that it's truly compelling.

Re: God helped Jerry Yang win WSOP!
 

[ QUOTE ]
I only said it because it needed to be said openly.

Theists have this annoying habit of confusing complicated rationalization with compelling reason. It has come to a point where they can look at the huge body of "work" they've produced over the millennia and think that it's truly compelling.

[/ QUOTE ]
I am glad you said it. I like this direction of the debate in general. Especially after reading that Sam Harris article that was linked in SMP not too long ago. i.e. removing the theist v. atheist crap and going straight for the reason jugular.

Re: God helped Jerry Yang win WSOP!
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I only said it because it needed to be said openly.

Theists have this annoying habit of confusing complicated rationalization with compelling reason. It has come to a point where they can look at the huge body of "work" they've produced over the millennia and think that it's truly compelling.

[/ QUOTE ]
I am glad you said it. I like this direction of the debate in general. Especially after reading that Sam Harris article that was linked in SMP not too long ago. i.e. removing the theist v. atheist crap and going straight for the reason jugular.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is that a lot of the theists whose jugular you're going for don't understand 'reason.'

wiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii man is a new board theist. He's already admonished some non-believers for not being logical.

[ QUOTE ]
I think there is more then we know as facts and since we can exist, the universe does, and billion other things could that we do not know about, I feel it's pretty logical to take leaps of faith on things like religion if it gives us answers to our purpose on this earth , right and wrong, etc.

It takes Steps, I believe in my existence, I believe in a Creator, I believe in the infinite universe, the Bible makes sense to me, BOM clicks as truth to me, I felt the power the spirit that book brings. Put them together and I think it's more logical to have those convictions then just believing in randomness and nothing.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is what constitutes reason.

You're talking two different languages. Reason to a theist means "whatever sounds good that coincides with my beliefs."

Re: God helped Jerry Yang win WSOP!
 

[ QUOTE ]
You're talking two different languages. Reason to a theist means "whatever sounds good that coincides with my beliefs."

[/ QUOTE ]
Very true and a good point. If people want to be intellectually dishonest, there is nothing we can do other than point it out to them. The statements that Wiiii (and others) try to pass of as reason are anything but. They objectively fail tests for truth. This should concern them quite a bit if what they say is true and they were open-minded.

If the God they propose existed, there would be good reasons to believe so unless he was tricking us or testing us, in which case the entire topic falls apart. That is my one sentence summary objection to theism. Can any theists here address it?

Re: God helped Jerry Yang win WSOP!
 

http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/556...nossifoeu2.jpg

Re: God helped Jerry Yang win WSOP!
 

[ QUOTE ]
If the God they propose existed, there would be good reasons to believe so unless he was tricking us or testing us, in which case the entire topic falls apart. That is my one sentence summary objection to theism. Can any theists here address it?

[/ QUOTE ]

there are good reasons. see this link about fulfilled prophecies. if god didn't exist then how do you explain these prophecies? on second thought, don't tell me. just read this huge list of prophecies and be edified.

Re: God helped Jerry Yang win WSOP!
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If the God they propose existed, there would be good reasons to believe so unless he was tricking us or testing us, in which case the entire topic falls apart. That is my one sentence summary objection to theism. Can any theists here address it?

[/ QUOTE ]

there are good reasons. see this <a href="bullshiat" target="_blank">link</a> about fulfilled prophecies. if god didn't exist then how do you explain these prophecies? on second thought, don't tell me. just read this huge list of prophecies and be edified.

[/ QUOTE ]
lol @ the link, I tried clicking on it first. My request was kind of stupid in retrospect since it had already been established that jury-rigged reasoning will be used.

I am a glutton for punishment I guess.

Re: God helped Jerry Yang win WSOP!
 

I don't get all the anger. You should be happy that now there is a very slight chance of an influx of new blood into the pokerworld: religious fanatics who think God will give them a two-outer.

Could happen!

Re: God helped Jerry Yang win WSOP!
 

It's kinda hard to follow this debate when splendour doesn't use any periods. I just read kurto's responses so it became a one sided debate.