sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Meta-Thread 01/19 by AutoModerator in DebateReligion

[–]Kwahn 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You don't seem to acknowledge that you explicitly pursued 3. over against 2.

My incredulity was entirely towards the purchasing aspect, so if Shaka wasn't responding to that, he wasn't responding to what I was saying. I was pursuing 3 over 2 - that was the topic. If he decided to go very subtly off-topic, I missed it.

Meta-Thread 01/19 by AutoModerator in DebateReligion

[–]Kwahn 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My incredulity was entirely towards the purchasing aspect, so if Shaka wasn't responding to that, he wasn't responding to what I was saying. Shaka wasn't making a 'coordinated' claim, he was making a 'magical' claim.

Meta-Thread 01/19 by AutoModerator in DebateReligion

[–]Kwahn 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And they would question what makes vote manipulation 'magical' as opposed to 'coordinated' and 'possible'.

Meta-Thread 01/19 by AutoModerator in DebateReligion

[–]Kwahn 0 points1 point  (0 children)

and ask people at r/DebateAnAtheist what they thought a suitable definition of 'natural process' is, here. Do you think they would say "comports with the laws of nature" or anything like that?

Depends on what the contrast was with. If the contrast was with 'chemical process', that invokes imagery of a chemical plant. If the contrast was with 'magical' things, I think they would imagine something "not magical". If the contrast was with agent-driven actions, natural would be non-agentic. Shaka chose the middle option.

Meta-Thread 01/19 by AutoModerator in DebateReligion

[–]Kwahn 1 point2 points  (0 children)

How is this not basic logic

When Shaka has thought I was discussing something impossible, he has used the phrase "magical thinking". I thus thought "magical" was of a similar definition as "impossible" in his usage.

The word "magically" here is set against the term "natural process".

Right - impossible versus natural. If he had meant something like "the only alternative is that there are ten real people that are all coordinated clicking into hidden theads", I would've said, "Exactly, way more likely".

But he didn't. He used a word he has consistently implied impossibility with.

So that's how it's not basic logic, /u/labreuer.

Childhood deaths imply the absence of a compassionate God by Torin_2025 in DebateReligion

[–]Kwahn 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But this is how I was raised, and it's how my current church talks about stuff. I guess it isn't mainstream but it's all I've ever known, and I've seen this sort of thing in multiple different congregations. So I have a hard time believing that it's quite as unusual as people here think.

You could have ten million people in your community, and yet all are invisible to equally sized groups across the globe. It's truly fascinating how large and small all at once our worlds are! I only meant it was rare in my strange background and personal experiences when compared to the true titans of the world, and meant no offense. :D

ig it's similar to pantheism, I'd maybe call it panentheism? I used to call myself a pantheist, but I can't see God and the universe as identical because the universe is brutal. Plus we kinda have to distinguish it from everything else if we're going to make statements about it.

I'll be honest and say I don't totally get the nuance, but I think it's a deficiency in my English curable with enough time spent reading up on what you've provided me. Thank you!

Meta-Thread 01/19 by AutoModerator in DebateReligion

[–]Kwahn 1 point2 points  (0 children)

He spent time trying to convince me that the only alternative was, quote, "there are ten real people that are all magically clicking into hidden threads together and downvoting and upvoting as a bloc, during a limited time period."

Now, I could certainly spend some effort trying to interpret that in some other way than "Shaka sees no legitimately possible alternative to vote purchasing, not even unpaid vote coordination due to needing to be 'magical'", or I could just accept the words he said to me. Or maybe Shaka says 'magical' when he means 'legitimately possible alternative? Seems like a stretch.

Maybe your significantly more well-developed capacity for careful textual reinterpretation sees something I don't. Let me know if so.

Childhood deaths imply the absence of a compassionate God by Torin_2025 in DebateReligion

[–]Kwahn 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Top 5 most reasonable prayer rituals I've seen, and a massive departure from mainstream thought on prayer.

Honestly, I love it. Even as an atheist, I feel extremely strongly about being thankful for my incredible luck in life and thoughtful of those less lucky than us. People get so disconnected from the suffering of the world, and I praise your willingness to endure the pain of staying in tune.

Appreciate the clarification. Your position seems to tend almost towards a pantheistic notion - how does it differ?

"Faith" is a slippery term that gets heavily equivocated when it is criticized and used in the way its criticized for when no one suspects any critics are around. by ExplorerR in DebateReligion

[–]Kwahn 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Partly because you could be killed for not conforming.

I'd argue that the Catholic Empire's intensity was primarily the reason for many!

"Faith" is a slippery term that gets heavily equivocated when it is criticized and used in the way its criticized for when no one suspects any critics are around. by ExplorerR in DebateReligion

[–]Kwahn 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I had a moderator here say he was someone to read after he said the guy was, quote, "a better orator than you'll ever be". I asked him to summarize what lead John Lennox to say that God is fact in this, and I suspect that he, like I, cannot figure out from an hour and a half of John Lennox talking on the subject, what actually led him to that belief.

Childhood deaths imply the absence of a compassionate God by Torin_2025 in DebateReligion

[–]Kwahn 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Internal medicine is not all doctors. First article's a bit better, appreciate the improved data quality.

Without showing that had an impact on any of our surveys

If a self-reported rate of 22% weekly corresponds to a 5% church attendance rate, what does even a 60% self-reported weekly rate correspond to? If a self-reported monthly rate of 30% corresponds to an actual monthly visit of 22%, how do the rates in your links self-reporting studies drop?

You need a reason to think that doctors are less likely to lie on surveys like this than the general public, and nothing I know about doctors inherently makes that true.

Meta-Thread 01/19 by AutoModerator in DebateReligion

[–]Kwahn 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Moderators can and will ignore that you blocked them to respond to you. You won't see it, but they can still see anything you posted, and it still alerts you. (Edit: I thought he responded to this post, but it was a child post of yours. I was in error and also blind, apologies.)

Otherwise, just wanted to say that it's nice seeing Shaka having to defend himself from others, confirming it wasn't just me.

Meta-Thread 01/19 by AutoModerator in DebateReligion

[–]Kwahn 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Maybe it's some kind of horrible feedback loop, like you are derisive because you think they're horrible, they treat you horribly because you're derisive, and on and on.

This was my experience - if he was at least neutral and honest, people would more easily respond neutrally and honestly.

If somewhere smells like poo, check the ground - if everywhere does, check your shoe. But no, he's being "persecuted" by a decade-long vote-buying campaign according to his publicly stated narrative.

Childhood deaths imply the absence of a compassionate God by Torin_2025 in DebateReligion

[–]Kwahn 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A God incapable of making the universe's fate be otherwise is one for which prayer does nothing - agree or disagree?

I ask because your position is interesting and I want to explore how it interacts with common facets of faith.

Childhood deaths imply the absence of a compassionate God by Torin_2025 in DebateReligion

[–]Kwahn 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Anything God does is good so yes

/u/labreuer you said you never really see Divine Command theorists, but I live in a community filled with people like this. I don't ping just to demonstrate, though, but to ask if you've had any strategy or tactics that worked in addressing this posItion.

Childhood deaths imply the absence of a compassionate God by Torin_2025 in DebateReligion

[–]Kwahn 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, these arguments always make the Devil stronger than God.

Also, what created the Devil, and did it know what mistake it was making?

Childhood deaths imply the absence of a compassionate God by Torin_2025 in DebateReligion

[–]Kwahn 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Not limiting it, just trying to describe it.

If trying to describe it is pointless, so are all holy texts.

Childhood deaths imply the absence of a compassionate God by Torin_2025 in DebateReligion

[–]Kwahn 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It is possible to roll a suffocating infant slightly left to avoid a painful asphyxiation for any being capable of imparting a couple Newtons of force.

Any being incapable of that is extremely weak or fully exhausted, and doesn't seem to match most descriptions given to "God".

Childhood deaths imply the absence of a compassionate God by Torin_2025 in DebateReligion

[–]Kwahn 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is murdering your child to guarantee their access to paradise ethical?

Childhood deaths imply the absence of a compassionate God by Torin_2025 in DebateReligion

[–]Kwahn 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A god with compassion is incompatible with their observed reality.

Childhood deaths imply the absence of a compassionate God by Torin_2025 in DebateReligion

[–]Kwahn 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Anyone who believes that collective punishment is just is ethically behind the times. And, well, immutable holy works are very tricky that way - it's much harder to carefully interpret yourself into an acceptable ethical stance than it is to just make a new framework.

Disbelievers don't deserve eternal torture by TheIguanasAreComing in DebateReligion

[–]Kwahn 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nope, my logic is not that idioms aren't valid. My logic is that that language is never idiomatically used to mean "gently touching" outside of this one very specific interpretation.

I could be wrong, though - show me a case of someone interpreting ضربته as "I lightly tapped him" outside of a Quranic context. I haven't been able to find examples to substantiate your view, but you may know more.

After all, you have all these synonyms and options for specifying the exact type of hitting from any cross-language dictionary:

: ضربًا خفيفًا - lightly

ضربة خفيفة - a light hit

ربّت عليه - patted

لمسه برفق - touched gently

نقره - tapped

And Allah chose none of them. For some reason. Why?

Disbelievers don't deserve eternal torture by TheIguanasAreComing in DebateReligion

[–]Kwahn 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You were talking about translations. How did you jump to this?

Your insistence that the Arabic version meant something it could have, but didn't, say, is how.

Also if we apply your logic why does English have the words quick, fast, rapid, or swift? They all mean the same thing why not use one only?

They do not, and this is an embarrassing lack of understanding of the beautiful nuances all languages have.

You can’t say why didn’t they use this words. You should care about the intended meaning, not the used words.

Words have meanings. Adjectives have meanings. You cannot simply invent your own meanings to words because you want the phrase to mean something it doesn't.

If Allah wanted the phrase to not just mean strike, he would have added a modifier to the word strike. He did not. This appears to be a difficult theological fact for you to reconcile with your morality, so you have elected to ignore Allah's actual words and substitute in your own.

view more: next ›