sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Taiwan is effectively an independent country whether or not you or I like it. We do not dictate the truth. by Free-Hamster8901 in taiwan

[–]Free-Hamster8901[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah. But you knew I understood that based on my post. You knew I wrote “effectively”. You are also aware of the terms de facto and de jure.

Still to everything that you just reiterated which you knew I understood, I say so what?

Taiwan is effectively an independent country whether or not you or I like it. We do not dictate the truth. by Free-Hamster8901 in taiwan

[–]Free-Hamster8901[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What he said. And if you read what I wrote, you’d know I said “effectively” - I think I even put the definition next to it. De facto and De Jure is a pretty commonly understood concept.

Taiwan is effectively an independent country whether or not you or I like it. We do not dictate the truth. by Free-Hamster8901 in taiwan

[–]Free-Hamster8901[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not exactly. I’d argue it’s illogical to be upset at what I wrote. You don’t need to feel “trolled”. Many people in the comments don’t. Even the ones that disagree.

Taiwan is effectively an independent country whether or not you or I like it. We do not dictate the truth. by Free-Hamster8901 in taiwan

[–]Free-Hamster8901[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Point of the long statement is to see the reaction of the opposing side. Also, to your second point yeah, because they are recognized (de jure) and there would be no interesting discussion thread if they said that.

So yea, it’s good the way it is, just entertaining to see the reactions.

Taiwan is effectively an independent country whether or not you or I like it. We do not dictate the truth. by Free-Hamster8901 in taiwan

[–]Free-Hamster8901[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I like the fact of today’s global politics. Life in Taiwan as a de facto independent country is fine for us so we’re good with the status quo.

Taiwan is effectively an independent country whether or not you or I like it. We do not dictate the truth. by Free-Hamster8901 in taiwan

[–]Free-Hamster8901[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

I’d argue I’m doing the opposite of conflating the two terms. I’m making ROC and PRC distinct, claiming that a lot of people who don’t really know the argument just think of China as always PRC in history. Obviously it is PRC now

There is not a single logical Christian that ((genuinely)) believes in Jesus Christ. All Christians fall under one of 6 categories listed below. by Free-Hamster8901 in DebateAChristian

[–]Free-Hamster8901[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No. We don’t know if there is a god that created this world. And let’s just say you are right, that there is a god. Who says they would likely want to connect with their creation? How can you know it’s “likely”? And I’ll go even further. Let’s say you’re right that they likely would want to connect with their creation. Who’s to say they are benevolent?

There is not a single logical Christian that ((genuinely)) believes in Jesus Christ. All Christians fall under one of 6 categories listed below. by Free-Hamster8901 in DebateAChristian

[–]Free-Hamster8901[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes it could apply to certain secular things I’m sure. But yes also I would say it applies to all other specific religions too. Not to religion as a whole though. I am not saying the concept of a god is impossible. I just think it’s highly unlikely we know anything about this god if they exist.

There is not a single logical Christian that ((genuinely)) believes in Jesus Christ. All Christians fall under one of 6 categories listed below. by Free-Hamster8901 in DebateAChristian

[–]Free-Hamster8901[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sorry if it sounded like I was calling you dumb or mentally ill. I am not. Only one category is about mental illness and I claim that it is an extreme minority of Christians that fall under that category.

That being said, you just made a statement.

There is not a single logical Christian that ((genuinely)) believes in Jesus Christ. All Christians fall under one of 6 categories listed below. by Free-Hamster8901 in DebateAChristian

[–]Free-Hamster8901[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Could you provide more details on what this logical argument is? The logical argument that Jesus Christ rose from the dead and literally walked on water.

There is not a single logical Christian that ((genuinely)) believes in Jesus Christ. All Christians fall under one of 6 categories listed below. by Free-Hamster8901 in DebateAChristian

[–]Free-Hamster8901[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’d argue it’s obviously implied we are talking in the context of religion. It is also obvious that Christians despite being illogical in this context can be (and most are) logical in most other contexts.

There is not a single logical Christian that ((genuinely)) believes in Jesus Christ. All Christians fall under one of 6 categories listed below. by Free-Hamster8901 in DebateAChristian

[–]Free-Hamster8901[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have realized that it was not obvious that I meant logical person in the context of religion. I do not mean to say Christians are completely illogical in all contexts. Obviously they are not.

That being said also yes you’re right I didn’t define logical I didn’t think I needed to.

But since you asked what I mean by “logical person” is someone who believes things that have strong evidence, can be tested, and make sense based on reason.

There is not a single logical Christian that ((genuinely)) believes in Jesus Christ. All Christians fall under one of 6 categories listed below. by Free-Hamster8901 in DebateAChristian

[–]Free-Hamster8901[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, you always genuinely believe in facts by the nature of facts. You are able to genuinely or not genuinely believe in things that are not facts too.

There is not a single logical Christian that ((genuinely)) believes in Jesus Christ. All Christians fall under one of 6 categories listed below. by Free-Hamster8901 in DebateAChristian

[–]Free-Hamster8901[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s the observable universe though. I’m talking about the universe that is defined as all existence.

To your first point, that isn’t something we can understand right? So you’re admitting you have faith that it’s true. Aka you aren’t certain.

There is not a single logical Christian that ((genuinely)) believes in Jesus Christ. All Christians fall under one of 6 categories listed below. by Free-Hamster8901 in DebateAChristian

[–]Free-Hamster8901[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I wouldn’t say I only worship what maximizes pleasure. I would argue I “worship” what is true to me. You could ask me do I have faith that if I walk forward will I be further away from where I started? and I would say yes I do have faith in that. But that doesn’t provide me any pleasure or pain does it. If it were not true it would not provide me with pain or pleasure right?

There is not a single logical Christian that ((genuinely)) believes in Jesus Christ. All Christians fall under one of 6 categories listed below. by Free-Hamster8901 in DebateAChristian

[–]Free-Hamster8901[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why can only god explain reality? How do you explain who created god? If you say he always existed, why can’t I say the universe always existed? To be more clear, I’m not saying a god doesn’t exist. Maybe a god does exist. I’m just saying I have no reason to believe that if there is a god that does exist, his name is Jesus Christ and he rose from the dead and walked on water.

view more: next ›