Worldview Discussion on Skype

Theocrat

Theocrat

Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
9,550
This Thursday, July 8, 2010, at 9:00 PM CST, I will be hosting a Skype chatroom discussion on religious/philosphical worldviews. Some of the topics to be discussed will be related to social evils, political beliefs, and religious commitments when it comes to science, logic, and morality.

I'd like to invite all members of this forum to attend this discussion so we can learn from each other and get to the bottom of our beliefs and proofs which we all take for granted as being true or correct. So bring your evidences, questions, and objections to the chatroom this Thursday, and hopefully it will be a lively and fruitful interchange of ideas.

My username on Skype is "Theonomist," so feel free to add me to your Contact List at your leisure. To sign up for a free Skype account, click here.
 
I don't like arguing over things that "exist" outside the realm of existence such as flying donkeys, giant magic boogers, or the gods that you've committed yourselves to. Really is no point in joining you fellas.
 
MRoCkEd said:
He's inviting anyone to the discussion, so hopefully there will be some atheists (and "atheists" :p) too.

I'll try to attend.
Click to expand...

yes, hopefully there will be "people who don't believe in magic" in attendance. :p
 
Live_Free_Or_Die said:
Like the magic of universes spontaneously appearing out of nothing?
Click to expand...

Live_Free_Or_Die, please stop playing to both sides of this argument as you have countless times in other threads. Not knowing something, and not knowing something and then attributing it to a magic fairy are not equivalent.
 
eOs said:
Live_Free_Or_Die, please stop playing to both sides of this argument as you have countless times in other threads. Not knowing something, and not knowing something and then attributing it to a magic fairy are not equivalent.
Click to expand...

They are exactly the same when you claim to know or theorize as to what the something you don't know is.

Re: "both sides of this argument as you have countless times in other threads"
Care to back that up with some posting history?
pacifier.jpg
 
Last edited:
Live_Free_Or_Die said:
They are exactly the same when you claim to know or theorize as to what the something you don't know is.
Click to expand...

Since you think you know, may I ask you what you think my beliefs on the origins of the universe are? This ought to be good..hey I like that pic!
 
An Opportunity to Explain Your Cause

This will be an opportunity for "free-thinkers" and skeptics to challenge and present their case for why God doesn't exist, why one doesn't need religion to be moral, and why religion is foolish or dangerous. I'm surprised more of you are not interested in this type of discussion because it's the sort of thing which brings to life all the fundamental questions of our existence.

So, come join us, and let's have a rational discourse on the things which we differ on in hopes we may come to a better light about the truth.
 
Theocrat said:
This will be an opportunity for "free-thinkers" and skeptics to challenge and present their case for why God doesn't exist
Click to expand...

No one needs to present their case but the people claiming to know the origins of the universe, and that's you Theo. Still waiting for you to stop jumping through logic hoops and present some real evidence...
 
Both Sides Bare the Burden of Proof

eOs said:
No one needs to present their case but the people claiming to know the origins of the universe, and that's you Theo. Still waiting for you to stop jumping through logic hoops and present some real evidence...
Click to expand...

If you expect me to present evidence for the existence of God (which I'd be glad to), then I expect you to present evidence for the nonexistence of God. You say there is no God, so there must be some evidence which warrants your belief in that proposition. Otherwise, you're believing something for which there is no evidence, and by default, you're being arbitrary.
 
Theocrat said:
If you expect me to present evidence for the existence of God (which I'd be glad to), then I expect you to present evidence for the nonexistence of God. You say there is no God, so there must be some evidence which warrants your belief in that proposition. Otherwise, you're believing something for which there is no evidence, and by default, you're being arbitrary.
Click to expand...

Actually, only the positive claimant bears the burden of proof. /end rant
 
Theocrat said:
If you expect me to present evidence for the existence of God (which I'd be glad to), then I expect you to present evidence for the nonexistence of God.
Click to expand...

lol, you gotta be kidding me!

You say there is no God, so there must be some evidence which warrants your belief in that proposition. Otherwise, you're believing something for which there is no evidence, and by default, you're being arbitrary.
Click to expand...

how about, there's LACK of evidence which warrants his DOUBT of that proposition (which he didn't make himself). And he's DOUBTING something which he finds not enough sufficient evidence for, and by default, would not simply accept.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Z
"Unsanctioned" Presidential Debate Tonight! 1/18!
Replies
0
Views
285
ZakCarter
Z
PAF
Freedom from Digital Hell Depends on Trump’s “Multiple Personality Disorder”
Replies
0
Views
469
PAF
PAF
PAF
The Mises-Hoiles Correspondence: What Might Have Been
Replies
0
Views
897
PAF
PAF
PAF
The Heinous Constitution: An Abominable Curse on the Liberty of All
Replies
0
Views
368
PAF
PAF
Anti Federalist
The Satanic Abortion Clinic That’s Pissed Off Pretty Much Everyone
Replies
5
Views
915
Anti Federalist
Anti Federalist
Back
Top