Is There One Sound/valid Syllogistic Argument For The Existence Of God?

[Inevitable]

He isn't even looking at the bible he is making shit up that is in opposition to the bible.

Such as?

Most of what you said. Particularly about there being proof of God.

Such as?

I already answered this.

Such as?

This question first make any sense

 

[Inevitable]

Everybody that refuted you is a phoney?

Such as?

Such as every time you called me a punk or a phoney.

You frighten so easily from discussion that forces you to think, you just lash out at people.

It's quite sad.

You don't like me. Got it punk. I got it the first time punk. I don't like your ****** ass. So now we're even.





Topic. OP. Facts. Issues. Got any?

I don't think the topic is whether or not we like each other. I am sorry you don't like me, though I can't really do anything about that.

But if you ever stopworrying about me and my sexuality and how I feel about you, we could get back on the topic.

Which is proof that God exists I am still waiting.

 

[G.T.]

MD and Justin now both resorting to calling a poster "******?"

They are beyond ******* losers at this point.

I actually hope more theres some sort of good god now so they can face the damn flames, dirtbags.

TAG is childish, as as you see the idiots who think that presupposing an outcome can prove said outcome are cut from that same childish cloth.

"******?" Really? Are we 12, bully boys? You are damn lames. Called it from jump.

 

[Inevitable]

MD and Justin now both resorting to calling a poster "******?"

They are beyond ******* losers at this point.

I actually hope more theres some sort of good god now so they can face the damn flames, dirtbags.

TAG is childish, as as you see the idiots who think that presupposing an outcome can prove said outcome are cut from that same childish cloth.

"******?" Really? Are we 12, bully boys? You are damn lames. Called it from jump.

They both accused me of attacking them.

It really doesn't bother me, it made them look foolish.

Internet jerks don't really bother me. Honestly I just chuckled at it.

 

[amrchaos]

Gateaux means from the hood

so instead of being the GOTO person
it's about being the Gateaux person?

is that Ghetto speak?
or Gateaux speak?

Seriously
GT do you or amrchaos or Inevitable
have any suggestions what TERMS to use
for explaining the distinction
Boss means by man's logic as less than God's
vs.
Justin and MD trying to stick with God's logic
and represent that using Man's logic terms.

They are talking in circles using "logic" in 3-4 different contexts.
Can you wonder why they all think the other is skewing it.

Reminds me of a very tragic case in Dallas
where the authorities questioned if the mother (from India)
had killed her son found dead, and she nodded her head no
which they took to mean yes. So they filed in the police report
she had confessed to killing her son, because her Indian
gestures were mistaken and misread to mean the OPPOSITE.
She was a grieving mother who sacrificed her career to be
at home and tend to her seriously ill son, and when he died of
one of the seizures, she kept his body on ice until the Father
got home from out of town so the family could handle the burial rites
according to Indian cultural tradition. Instead both parents killed
themselves when they could not overturn the charges of murder
caused by miscommunication and cultural differences.

Here is not so serious, but Justin has basically given us all
the death penalty mentally, accusing us of being phony because we
can't seem to communicate what we mean and he can't connect
it to what he is trying to say either. So we sound fake to him that
we are just talking mumbo jumbo for the sake of arguing in circles
over nothing when it is all plain as day to him.

clearly we are not connecting so we sound completely
off base and going around in our own circles and not
any plane of reality that the other person is coming from.

whoever can see that we are all experiencing similar "blank outs"
will quit the business of namecalling accusing or insulting anyone for this.

the key is to align each of these systems by parallels
especially if our worlds do not intersect. they
may mirror each other and we need to align
the "equivalent" terms principles or relations
in each system. And the parallels drawn may not be the
same for the next person, but each may need to be
resolved distinctly.

Boss is describing the relation with "logic" in a different way
to divide up the "spectrum or context" differently
so this is not going to match with Justin or MD.
instead of fighting over whose system is going to
dominate or replace theother, I'm saying to let
each person KEEP their own system and
translate where things lie under both systems
and line up the similar concepts that are close equivalents.

G.T. if you can work with Boss to hunt around
for better terms or descriptions to specify what
Boss is talking about where Justin and MD agree
that is true in their system, I can try to work with
MD and Justin with the terms they use on their side.

by trial and error, hit or miss, something has to align
because we are all trying to desribe how human nature
relates to the higher or collective level of truth/knowledge/logic.

the content underneath is the same for all people
but our expressions for these abstract levels
can get very complex (the Buddhist have even more
different terms for the levels of awareness that
American English does not distinguish from each other).
In Eskimo language there are more words for SNOW
while we only have one. And Greeks had different
words for the different types of LOVE while English
requires modifiers. So what about God and logic,
how many different levels or aspect could we
quantify there?

First, when Boss says "God created logic" then I feel that we are far a field of conceiving this God.

When Boss talks of "God's logic" I can only assume that there is some abstract method that this God created for itself to follow in terms of this creation. I am not even sure if this God can change "God's logic" at will, but it seems like it can.


I guess a BAD analogy is like a programing languge(like C ++) on a computer versus the Operating system that makes programming possible. The programming language is Man logic. All logic(programming language) only works on the computer because the programmer(God) set up the operating system(God's logic) for that program to work on.

In such a situation, God can wipe out the old operating system and put in a totally different operating system, and then put mans logic(programming language) can be placed back on that computer but the way it interacts with the new OS maybe different than how it worked with the old OS.

In this case, God's logic is the framework for man's logic to work on.

 

[G.T.]

Gateaux means from the hood

so instead of being the GOTO person
it's about being the Gateaux person?

is that Ghetto speak?
or Gateaux speak?

Seriously
GT do you or amrchaos or Inevitable
have any suggestions what TERMS to use
for explaining the distinction
Boss means by man's logic as less than God's
vs.
Justin and MD trying to stick with God's logic
and represent that using Man's logic terms.

They are talking in circles using "logic" in 3-4 different contexts.
Can you wonder why they all think the other is skewing it.

Reminds me of a very tragic case in Dallas
where the authorities questioned if the mother (from India)
had killed her son found dead, and she nodded her head no
which they took to mean yes. So they filed in the police report
she had confessed to killing her son, because her Indian
gestures were mistaken and misread to mean the OPPOSITE.
She was a grieving mother who sacrificed her career to be
at home and tend to her seriously ill son, and when he died of
one of the seizures, she kept his body on ice until the Father
got home from out of town so the family could handle the burial rites
according to Indian cultural tradition. Instead both parents killed
themselves when they could not overturn the charges of murder
caused by miscommunication and cultural differences.

Here is not so serious, but Justin has basically given us all
the death penalty mentally, accusing us of being phony because we
can't seem to communicate what we mean and he can't connect
it to what he is trying to say either. So we sound fake to him that
we are just talking mumbo jumbo for the sake of arguing in circles
over nothing when it is all plain as day to him.

clearly we are not connecting so we sound completely
off base and going around in our own circles and not
any plane of reality that the other person is coming from.

whoever can see that we are all experiencing similar "blank outs"
will quit the business of namecalling accusing or insulting anyone for this.

the key is to align each of these systems by parallels
especially if our worlds do not intersect. they
may mirror each other and we need to align
the "equivalent" terms principles or relations
in each system. And the parallels drawn may not be the
same for the next person, but each may need to be
resolved distinctly.

Boss is describing the relation with "logic" in a different way
to divide up the "spectrum or context" differently
so this is not going to match with Justin or MD.
instead of fighting over whose system is going to
dominate or replace theother, I'm saying to let
each person KEEP their own system and
translate where things lie under both systems
and line up the similar concepts that are close equivalents.

G.T. if you can work with Boss to hunt around
for better terms or descriptions to specify what
Boss is talking about where Justin and MD agree
that is true in their system, I can try to work with
MD and Justin with the terms they use on their side.

by trial and error, hit or miss, something has to align
because we are all trying to desribe how human nature
relates to the higher or collective level of truth/knowledge/logic.

the content underneath is the same for all people
but our expressions for these abstract levels
can get very complex (the Buddhist have even more
different terms for the levels of awareness that
American English does not distinguish from each other).
In Eskimo language there are more words for SNOW
while we only have one. And Greeks had different
words for the different types of LOVE while English
requires modifiers. So what about God and logic,
how many different levels or aspect could we
quantify there?

First, when Boss says "God created logic" then I feel that we are far a field of conceiving this God.

When Boss talks of "God's logic" I can only assume that there is some abstract method that this God created for itself to follow in terms of this creation. I am not even sure if this God can change "God's logic" at will, but it seems like it can.


I guess a BAD analogy is like a programing languge(like C ++) on a computer versus the Operating system that makes programming possible. The programming language is Man logic. All logic(programming language) only works on the computer because the programmer(God) set up the operating system(God's logic) for that program to work on.

In such a situation, God can wipe out the old operating system and put in a totally different operating system, and then put mans logic(programming language) can be placed back on that computer but the way it interacts with the new OS maybe different than how it worked with the old OS.

In this case, God's logic is the framework for man's logic to work on.

This reminds me to rant - 343 better fix their damn server issues, they launched Halo Monday at midnight and its been a nightmare trying to get in a game ever since.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Inevitable the Drama Queen


Inevitable: Hi, everybody, my name's Inevitable, and I, like, you know, believe in God and stuff, but not really. Giggle It's really nice to believe in God. I get all warm and fuzzy inside when I believe in God, but not really. I just like saying that. People should really believe in God, but not really, because there's really no proof or evidence for God's existence, and all those millions of people who have said or believed there is over the centuries are big, fat, poop-poop heads. Giggle I mean, you know, like, gag me with a spoon, right? Giggle I just believe in God and stuff because, well, like, God, you know, God. Think about that . . . but not really. God! Wow! Just think about that . . . but not really. That gives me goose bumps, thrills and chills, and I get all giggly and emotional and weepy and sentimental . . . and boorish and shrewish when I believe in God just because. Giggle

I believe in the Bible too, but not really, because it says that there's proof and evidence for God's existence, and only poop-poop heads believe that. Giggle I don't really know anything about God and stuff, I just believe in God and stuff, but not really. All that stuff about facts and logic and proof and evidence, that's poop-poop head stuff, but not really, because I don't really know anything about God and stuff. Giggle

And there's some poop-poop heads on this thread who say that the Bible teaches things that aren't in the Bible, but not really, because they are in the Bible. I just don't believe those things because only poop-poop heads believe those things, and besides it hurts my pretty wittle head to think about those things. Giggle

Well, that’s all I have to say, really, except that I want to say again, over and over again, that I don't like all those people who say and believe there's proof and evidence, because they're poop-poop heads . . . and I just waxed my chest . . . and I got some new shoes. Aren't they pretty? Giggle I got some new speedos too, pink, of course . . . and I like flowers and clouds . . . and I'm really tolerant and open-minded, because I'm not like, you know, one of those poop-poop heads who actually believe in real things. Just call me Mister Miss Group Think, one of the cool sheep. Giggle Oh, and I have a poodle, and I like to dress her up like a princess sometimes . . . and I like to pretend I'm Sleeping Beauty and stuff. Giggle Sometimes I like to pretend I'm Cinderella and stuff too. Giggle

Did I tell you that I don't like all those poop-poop heads who believe the facts and logic of God? Giggle

I think I'm really pretty and nice and sweet and special and as pure as the driven snow, and my poop-poop doesn't stink. Giggle And I'm really good and perfect and really smart . . . but not really. Giggle And did I tell you that I don't like all those poop-poop heads who believe the facts and logic of God? And did I tell you that I like flowers and clouds? Oh, and I like rainbows are us and stars and sparkly things . . . and I like to gossip and moralize and talk banalities and nothings. My favorite magazine is People. Oh, I'm really good at talking but never really saying anything at all that matters about anything. Giggle I just go on and on like that sometimes, never making a lick a sense at all. Giggle I'm so cute and funny that way.

Oh! Oh! And I like parties and shopping and texting and prancing and dancing and. . . .

Is There One Sound/Valid Syllogistic Argument For The Existence Of God?

The Seven Things™ that are objectively true for all regarding the problems of existence and origin due to the organic laws of human thought (the law of identity, the law of contradiction, the law of the excluded middle): http://www.usmessageboard.com/posts/10122836/.

 

[Boss]

But Boss' proposition is that God does exist and created the logic humans have.

Well, as I've shown, organic/classical logic negates that, so in organic/classical logic it's neither a logical necessity nor a logical possibility.

Sorry, you've simply NOT shown that.

 

[Hollie]

Inevitable the Drama Queen


Inevitable: Hi, everybody, my name's Inevitable, and I, like, you know, believe in God and stuff, but not really. Giggle It's really nice to believe in God. I get all warm and fuzzy inside when I believe in God, but not really. I just like saying that. People should really believe in God, but not really, because there's really no proof or evidence for God's existence, and all those millions of people who have said or believed there is over the centuries are big, fat, poop-poop heads. Giggle I mean, you know, like, gag me with a spoon, right? Giggle I just believe in God and stuff because, well, like, God, you know, God. Think about that . . . but not really. God! Wow! God! Just think about that . . . but not really. That gives me goose bumps, thrills and chills, and I get all giggly and emotional and weepy and sentimental . . . and boorish and shrewish when I believe in God just because. Giggle

I believe in the Bible too, but not really, because it says that there's proof and evidence, and only poop-poop heads believe that. Giggle I don't really know anything about God and stuff, I just believe in God and stuff, but not really. All that stuff about facts and proof and evidence, that's poop-poop head stuff, but not really, because I don't really know anything about God and stuff. Giggle

Well, that’s all I have to say, really, except that I want to say again, over and over again, that I don't like all those people who say and believe there's proof and evidence, because they're poop-poop heads . . . and I just waxed my chest and I got some new shoes. Aren't they pretty? Giggle I got some new speedos too . . . and I like flowers and clouds . . . and I'm really tolerant and open-minded, because I'm not like, you know, one of those poop-poop heads who actually believe in real things. Giggle Oh, and I have a poodle, and I like to dress her up like a princess sometimes . . . and I like to pretend I'm Sleeping Beauty and stuff. Giggle Sometimes I like to pretend I'm Cinderella and stuff too. Giggle

Did I tell you that I don't like all those poop-poop heads who believe the facts and logic of God? Giggle

I think I'm really pretty and nice and sweet and special and as pure as the driven snow, and my poop-poop doesn't stink. Giggle And I'm really good and perfect and really smart . . . but not really. Giggle And did I tell you that I don't like all those poop-poop heads who believe the facts and logic of God? And did I tell you that I like flowers and clouds? Oh, and I like rainbows are us and stars and sparkly things . . . and I like to gossip and moralize and talk banalities and nothings. My favorite magazine is People. Oh, I'm really good at talking but never really saying anything at all that matters about anything. Giggle I just go on and on like that sometimes, never making a lick a sense about anything. Giggle I'm so funny and cute that way.

Oh! Oh! And I like parties and shopping and texting and prancing and dancing and. . . .

Is There One Sound/valid Syllogistic Argument For The Existence Of God?

The Seven Things™ that are objectively true for all regarding the problems of existence and origin due to the organic laws of human thought (the law of identity, the law of contradiction, the law of the excluded middle): http://www.usmessageboard.com/posts/10122836/.

Gee whiz, fundie crank. Why are you still promoting your foul fraud of The Seven Fraudulent Things™ when that disaster of self-refuting, confused no sense was so thoroughly trashed?

 

[Boss]

So we can add another poster who came here in earnest that these two charlatan scumbags couldn't refrain from ad homming like a couple of prissy teenagers.

How many does that make, now?

I lost track around ten.

Yes, the number of people who they feel inclined to malign, insult, denigrate, lie about what was said and claim are "phonies" continues to grow. And it doesn't really seem to matter if they believe in a spiritual God or not... that's the amazing part. Rawlings continues to claim he has proven his argument but the only poster who seems to be totally convinced is Justin. Emily, bless her heart, keeps trying to reel them back into sanity and civility, but it doesn't seem to be working.

Like I said before, keep these two away from box cutters and airlines.

 

[Justin Davis]

Inevitable the Drama Queen


Inevitable: Hi, everybody, my name's Inevitable, and I, like, you know, believe in God and stuff, but not really. Giggle It's really nice to believe in God. I get all warm and fuzzy inside when I believe in God, but not really. I just like saying that. People should really believe in God, but not really, because there's really no proof or evidence for God's existence, and all those millions of people who have said or believed there is over the centuries are big, fat, poop-poop heads. Giggle I mean, you know, like, gag me with a spoon, right? Giggle I just believe in God and stuff because, well, like, God, you know, God. Think about that . . . but not really. God! Wow! God! Just think about that . . . but not really. That gives me goose bumps, thrills and chills, and I get all giggly and emotional and weepy and sentimental . . . and boorish and shrewish when I believe in God just because. Giggle

I believe in the Bible too, but not really, because it says that there's proof and evidence for God's existence, and only poop-poop heads believe that. Giggle I don't really know anything about God and stuff, I just believe in God and stuff, but not really. All that stuff about facts and proof and evidence, that's poop-poop head stuff, but not really, because I don't really know anything about God and stuff. Giggle

And there's some poop-poop heads on this thread who say that the Bible teaches things that aren't in the Bible, but not really, because they are in the Bible. I just don't believe those things because only poop-poop heads believe those things, and besides it hurts my pretty wittle head to think about those things. Giggle

Well, that’s all I have to say, really, except that I want to say again, over and over again, that I don't like all those people who say and believe there's proof and evidence, because they're poop-poop heads . . . and I just waxed my chest and I got some new shoes. Aren't they pretty? Giggle I got some new speedos too . . . and I like flowers and clouds . . . and I'm really tolerant and open-minded, because I'm not like, you know, one of those poop-poop heads who actually believe in real things. Giggle Oh, and I have a poodle, and I like to dress her up like a princess sometimes . . . and I like to pretend I'm Sleeping Beauty and stuff. Giggle Sometimes I like to pretend I'm Cinderella and stuff too. Giggle

Did I tell you that I don't like all those poop-poop heads who believe the facts and logic of God? Giggle

I think I'm really pretty and nice and sweet and special and as pure as the driven snow, and my poop-poop doesn't stink. Giggle And I'm really good and perfect and really smart . . . but not really. Giggle And did I tell you that I don't like all those poop-poop heads who believe the facts and logic of God? And did I tell you that I like flowers and clouds? Oh, and I like rainbows are us and stars and sparkly things . . . and I like to gossip and moralize and talk banalities and nothings. My favorite magazine is People. Oh, I'm really good at talking but never really saying anything at all that matters about anything. Giggle I just go on and on like that sometimes, never making a lick a sense about anything. Giggle I'm so funny and cute that way.

Oh! Oh! And I like parties and shopping and texting and prancing and dancing and. . . .

Is There One Sound/valid Syllogistic Argument For The Existence Of God?

The Seven Things™ that are objectively true for all regarding the problems of existence and origin due to the organic laws of human thought (the law of identity, the law of contradiction, the law of the excluded middle): http://www.usmessageboard.com/posts/10122836/.

"Just think about that . . . but not really."

I know. Right?

 

[Justin Davis]

Everybody that refuted you is a phoney?

Such as?

Such as every time you called me a punk or a phoney.

You frighten so easily from discussion that forces you to think, you just lash out at people.

It's quite sad.

You don't like me. Got it punk. I got it the first time punk. I don't like your ****** ass. So now we're even.





Topic. OP. Facts. Issues. Got any?

I don't think the topic is whether or not we like each other. I am sorry you don't like me, though I can't really do anything about that.

But if you ever stopworrying about me and my sexuality and how I feel about you, we could get back on the topic.

Which is proof that God exists I am still waiting.

Go play with your poodle.

 

[Justin Davis]

Inevitable the Drama Queen


Inevitable: Hi, everybody, my name's Inevitable, and I, like, you know, believe in God and stuff, but not really. Giggle It's really nice to believe in God. I get all warm and fuzzy inside when I believe in God, but not really. I just like saying that. People should really believe in God, but not really, because there's really no proof or evidence for God's existence, and all those millions of people who have said or believed there is over the centuries are big, fat, poop-poop heads. Giggle I mean, you know, like, gag me with a spoon, right? Giggle I just believe in God and stuff because, well, like, God, you know, God. Think about that . . . but not really. God! Wow! God! Just think about that . . . but not really. That gives me goose bumps, thrills and chills, and I get all giggly and emotional and weepy and sentimental . . . and boorish and shrewish when I believe in God just because. Giggle

I believe in the Bible too, but not really, because it says that there's proof and evidence, and only poop-poop heads believe that. Giggle I don't really know anything about God and stuff, I just believe in God and stuff, but not really. All that stuff about facts and proof and evidence, that's poop-poop head stuff, but not really, because I don't really know anything about God and stuff. Giggle

Well, that’s all I have to say, really, except that I want to say again, over and over again, that I don't like all those people who say and believe there's proof and evidence, because they're poop-poop heads . . . and I just waxed my chest and I got some new shoes. Aren't they pretty? Giggle I got some new speedos too . . . and I like flowers and clouds . . . and I'm really tolerant and open-minded, because I'm not like, you know, one of those poop-poop heads who actually believe in real things. Giggle Oh, and I have a poodle, and I like to dress her up like a princess sometimes . . . and I like to pretend I'm Sleeping Beauty and stuff. Giggle Sometimes I like to pretend I'm Cinderella and stuff too. Giggle

Did I tell you that I don't like all those poop-poop heads who believe the facts and logic of God? Giggle

I think I'm really pretty and nice and sweet and special and as pure as the driven snow, and my poop-poop doesn't stink. Giggle And I'm really good and perfect and really smart . . . but not really. Giggle And did I tell you that I don't like all those poop-poop heads who believe the facts and logic of God? And did I tell you that I like flowers and clouds? Oh, and I like rainbows are us and stars and sparkly things . . . and I like to gossip and moralize and talk banalities and nothings. My favorite magazine is People. Oh, I'm really good at talking but never really saying anything at all that matters about anything. Giggle I just go on and on like that sometimes, never making a lick a sense about anything. Giggle I'm so funny and cute that way.

Oh! Oh! And I like parties and shopping and texting and prancing and dancing and. . . .

Is There One Sound/valid Syllogistic Argument For The Existence Of God?

The Seven Things™ that are objectively true for all regarding the problems of existence and origin due to the organic laws of human thought (the law of identity, the law of contradiction, the law of the excluded middle): http://www.usmessageboard.com/posts/10122836/.

Gee whiz, fundie crank. Why are you still promoting your foul fraud of The Seven Fraudulent Things™ when that disaster of self-refuting, confused no sense was so thoroughly trashed?

Go play with your poodle too.

 

[Boss]

Gateaux means from the hood

so instead of being the GOTO person
it's about being the Gateaux person?

is that Ghetto speak?
or Gateaux speak?

Seriously
GT do you or amrchaos or Inevitable
have any suggestions what TERMS to use
for explaining the distinction
Boss means by man's logic as less than God's
vs.
Justin and MD trying to stick with God's logic
and represent that using Man's logic terms.

They are talking in circles using "logic" in 3-4 different contexts.
Can you wonder why they all think the other is skewing it.

Reminds me of a very tragic case in Dallas
where the authorities questioned if the mother (from India)
had killed her son found dead, and she nodded her head no
which they took to mean yes. So they filed in the police report
she had confessed to killing her son, because her Indian
gestures were mistaken and misread to mean the OPPOSITE.
She was a grieving mother who sacrificed her career to be
at home and tend to her seriously ill son, and when he died of
one of the seizures, she kept his body on ice until the Father
got home from out of town so the family could handle the burial rites
according to Indian cultural tradition. Instead both parents killed
themselves when they could not overturn the charges of murder
caused by miscommunication and cultural differences.

Here is not so serious, but Justin has basically given us all
the death penalty mentally, accusing us of being phony because we
can't seem to communicate what we mean and he can't connect
it to what he is trying to say either. So we sound fake to him that
we are just talking mumbo jumbo for the sake of arguing in circles
over nothing when it is all plain as day to him.

clearly we are not connecting so we sound completely
off base and going around in our own circles and not
any plane of reality that the other person is coming from.

whoever can see that we are all experiencing similar "blank outs"
will quit the business of namecalling accusing or insulting anyone for this.

the key is to align each of these systems by parallels
especially if our worlds do not intersect. they
may mirror each other and we need to align
the "equivalent" terms principles or relations
in each system. And the parallels drawn may not be the
same for the next person, but each may need to be
resolved distinctly.

Boss is describing the relation with "logic" in a different way
to divide up the "spectrum or context" differently
so this is not going to match with Justin or MD.
instead of fighting over whose system is going to
dominate or replace theother, I'm saying to let
each person KEEP their own system and
translate where things lie under both systems
and line up the similar concepts that are close equivalents.

G.T. if you can work with Boss to hunt around
for better terms or descriptions to specify what
Boss is talking about where Justin and MD agree
that is true in their system, I can try to work with
MD and Justin with the terms they use on their side.

by trial and error, hit or miss, something has to align
because we are all trying to desribe how human nature
relates to the higher or collective level of truth/knowledge/logic.

the content underneath is the same for all people
but our expressions for these abstract levels
can get very complex (the Buddhist have even more
different terms for the levels of awareness that
American English does not distinguish from each other).
In Eskimo language there are more words for SNOW
while we only have one. And Greeks had different
words for the different types of LOVE while English
requires modifiers. So what about God and logic,
how many different levels or aspect could we
quantify there?

First, when Boss says "God created logic" then I feel that we are far a field of conceiving this God.

When Boss talks of "God's logic" I can only assume that there is some abstract method that this God created for itself to follow in terms of this creation. I am not even sure if this God can change "God's logic" at will, but it seems like it can.


I guess a BAD analogy is like a programing languge(like C ++) on a computer versus the Operating system that makes programming possible. The programming language is Man logic. All logic(programming language) only works on the computer because the programmer(God) set up the operating system(God's logic) for that program to work on.

In such a situation, God can wipe out the old operating system and put in a totally different operating system, and then put mans logic(programming language) can be placed back on that computer but the way it interacts with the new OS maybe different than how it worked with the old OS.

In this case, God's logic is the framework for man's logic to work on.

Correction: Boss has never implied or argued anything regarding this "God's Logic" nonsense. Boss contends that God doesn't need or depend on Logic and has omnipotence which negates any such need.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

But Boss' proposition is that God does exist and created the logic humans have.

Well, as I've shown, organic/classical logic negates that, so in organic/classical logic it's neither a logical necessity nor a logical possibility.

Sorry, you've simply NOT shown that.

Sorry, Boss, it just doesn't add up.


The Three Laws of Divine Thought According to Boss ≠ Boss, but = a Tiny Little god (Boss) in the Gap!

1. The Divine Law of Identity

God holds that for any given A: A ≠ A. Hence, God = Boss.

Check!​

2. The Divine Law of Contradiction

God holds that for any two or more propositions YES (A = NOT-A). Hence, the propositions that 2 + 2 = 4, 2 + 2 = Boss, and 2 + 2 = Boss' Grand Delusion are all true in all respects: at the same time, in the same way, within the same frame of reference.

Check!​

3. The Divine Law of the Excluded Middle

God holds that for all A: A AND ~A. Hence, the following positive and negative expressions regarding Boss' state of mind are true at the same time: Boss is crazier than a paranoid schizophrenic with a megaphone haranguing a manic depressive hallucinating on LSD and holding a shotgun, and Boss is not crazier than a paranoid schizophrenic with a megaphone haranguing a manic depressive hallucinating on LSD and holding a shotgun.

(Personally, I think God is wrong about Boss' state of mind, especially. Boss clearly is crazier than a paranoid schizophrenic with a megaphone haranguing a manic depressive hallucinating on LSD and holding a shotgun, only. Of course, Boss is also crazier than a polo team of fairies wearing boots (you gotta believe me!) mounted on the unicorns of pagan mythology and using a leprechaun for the ball while a pack of flying pink elephants cheer them on. But don't tell God, who is really Boss, that I said that or he might take the shotgun from the manic depressive and start pumping buck shot into his computer screen.)

Check!​

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Gateaux means from the hood

so instead of being the GOTO person
it's about being the Gateaux person?

is that Ghetto speak?
or Gateaux speak?

Seriously
GT do you or amrchaos or Inevitable
have any suggestions what TERMS to use
for explaining the distinction
Boss means by man's logic as less than God's
vs.
Justin and MD trying to stick with God's logic
and represent that using Man's logic terms.

They are talking in circles using "logic" in 3-4 different contexts.
Can you wonder why they all think the other is skewing it.

Reminds me of a very tragic case in Dallas
where the authorities questioned if the mother (from India)
had killed her son found dead, and she nodded her head no
which they took to mean yes. So they filed in the police report
she had confessed to killing her son, because her Indian
gestures were mistaken and misread to mean the OPPOSITE.
She was a grieving mother who sacrificed her career to be
at home and tend to her seriously ill son, and when he died of
one of the seizures, she kept his body on ice until the Father
got home from out of town so the family could handle the burial rites
according to Indian cultural tradition. Instead both parents killed
themselves when they could not overturn the charges of murder
caused by miscommunication and cultural differences.

Here is not so serious, but Justin has basically given us all
the death penalty mentally, accusing us of being phony because we
can't seem to communicate what we mean and he can't connect
it to what he is trying to say either. So we sound fake to him that
we are just talking mumbo jumbo for the sake of arguing in circles
over nothing when it is all plain as day to him.

clearly we are not connecting so we sound completely
off base and going around in our own circles and not
any plane of reality that the other person is coming from.

whoever can see that we are all experiencing similar "blank outs"
will quit the business of namecalling accusing or insulting anyone for this.

the key is to align each of these systems by parallels
especially if our worlds do not intersect. they
may mirror each other and we need to align
the "equivalent" terms principles or relations
in each system. And the parallels drawn may not be the
same for the next person, but each may need to be
resolved distinctly.

Boss is describing the relation with "logic" in a different way
to divide up the "spectrum or context" differently
so this is not going to match with Justin or MD.
instead of fighting over whose system is going to
dominate or replace theother, I'm saying to let
each person KEEP their own system and
translate where things lie under both systems
and line up the similar concepts that are close equivalents.

G.T. if you can work with Boss to hunt around
for better terms or descriptions to specify what
Boss is talking about where Justin and MD agree
that is true in their system, I can try to work with
MD and Justin with the terms they use on their side.

by trial and error, hit or miss, something has to align
because we are all trying to desribe how human nature
relates to the higher or collective level of truth/knowledge/logic.

the content underneath is the same for all people
but our expressions for these abstract levels
can get very complex (the Buddhist have even more
different terms for the levels of awareness that
American English does not distinguish from each other).
In Eskimo language there are more words for SNOW
while we only have one. And Greeks had different
words for the different types of LOVE while English
requires modifiers. So what about God and logic,
how many different levels or aspect could we
quantify there?

First, when Boss says "God created logic" then I feel that we are far a field of conceiving this God.

When Boss talks of "God's logic" I can only assume that there is some abstract method that this God created for itself to follow in terms of this creation. I am not even sure if this God can change "God's logic" at will, but it seems like it can.


I guess a BAD analogy is like a programing languge(like C ++) on a computer versus the Operating system that makes programming possible. The programming language is Man logic. All logic(programming language) only works on the computer because the programmer(God) set up the operating system(God's logic) for that program to work on.

In such a situation, God can wipe out the old operating system and put in a totally different operating system, and then put mans logic(programming language) can be placed back on that computer but the way it interacts with the new OS maybe different than how it worked with the old OS.

In this case, God's logic is the framework for man's logic to work on.

Correction: Boss has never implied or argued anything regarding this "God's Logic" nonsense. Boss contends that God doesn't need or depend on Logic and has omnipotence which negates any such need.

Sorry, Boss, that just doesn't add up. There has to be an operating system for there to be any subsequent rhyme or reason, and if that rhyme or reason is not consistent with the operating system, in this case, human logic anthropomorphizes God, and you have no legitimate grounds on which to assert anything about anything at all. You're not God Boss, and you never will be, but thanks for proving, once again, thanks for presupposing, once again, that God exists and that the laws of organic logic are necessarily God's logic, which was bestowed on us by God, not created.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Gateaux means from the hood

so instead of being the GOTO person
it's about being the Gateaux person?

is that Ghetto speak?
or Gateaux speak?

Seriously
GT do you or amrchaos or Inevitable
have any suggestions what TERMS to use
for explaining the distinction
Boss means by man's logic as less than God's
vs.
Justin and MD trying to stick with God's logic
and represent that using Man's logic terms.

They are talking in circles using "logic" in 3-4 different contexts.
Can you wonder why they all think the other is skewing it.

Reminds me of a very tragic case in Dallas
where the authorities questioned if the mother (from India)
had killed her son found dead, and she nodded her head no
which they took to mean yes. So they filed in the police report
she had confessed to killing her son, because her Indian
gestures were mistaken and misread to mean the OPPOSITE.
She was a grieving mother who sacrificed her career to be
at home and tend to her seriously ill son, and when he died of
one of the seizures, she kept his body on ice until the Father
got home from out of town so the family could handle the burial rites
according to Indian cultural tradition. Instead both parents killed
themselves when they could not overturn the charges of murder
caused by miscommunication and cultural differences.

Here is not so serious, but Justin has basically given us all
the death penalty mentally, accusing us of being phony because we
can't seem to communicate what we mean and he can't connect
it to what he is trying to say either. So we sound fake to him that
we are just talking mumbo jumbo for the sake of arguing in circles
over nothing when it is all plain as day to him.

clearly we are not connecting so we sound completely
off base and going around in our own circles and not
any plane of reality that the other person is coming from.

whoever can see that we are all experiencing similar "blank outs"
will quit the business of namecalling accusing or insulting anyone for this.

the key is to align each of these systems by parallels
especially if our worlds do not intersect. they
may mirror each other and we need to align
the "equivalent" terms principles or relations
in each system. And the parallels drawn may not be the
same for the next person, but each may need to be
resolved distinctly.

Boss is describing the relation with "logic" in a different way
to divide up the "spectrum or context" differently
so this is not going to match with Justin or MD.
instead of fighting over whose system is going to
dominate or replace theother, I'm saying to let
each person KEEP their own system and
translate where things lie under both systems
and line up the similar concepts that are close equivalents.

G.T. if you can work with Boss to hunt around
for better terms or descriptions to specify what
Boss is talking about where Justin and MD agree
that is true in their system, I can try to work with
MD and Justin with the terms they use on their side.

by trial and error, hit or miss, something has to align
because we are all trying to desribe how human nature
relates to the higher or collective level of truth/knowledge/logic.

the content underneath is the same for all people
but our expressions for these abstract levels
can get very complex (the Buddhist have even more
different terms for the levels of awareness that
American English does not distinguish from each other).
In Eskimo language there are more words for SNOW
while we only have one. And Greeks had different
words for the different types of LOVE while English
requires modifiers. So what about God and logic,
how many different levels or aspect could we
quantify there?

First, when Boss says "God created logic" then I feel that we are far a field of conceiving this God.

When Boss talks of "God's logic" I can only assume that there is some abstract method that this God created for itself to follow in terms of this creation. I am not even sure if this God can change "God's logic" at will, but it seems like it can.


I guess a BAD analogy is like a programing languge(like C ++) on a computer versus the Operating system that makes programming possible. The programming language is Man logic. All logic(programming language) only works on the computer because the programmer(God) set up the operating system(God's logic) for that program to work on.

In such a situation, God can wipe out the old operating system and put in a totally different operating system, and then put mans logic(programming language) can be placed back on that computer but the way it interacts with the new OS maybe different than how it worked with the old OS.

In this case, God's logic is the framework for man's logic to work on.

You do realized that you just proved the double proofs of the TAG again, don't you? No, of course, you don't.

 

[Boss]

Rawlings, why don't you stop lying and contorting what people say and drop all the long-winded high brow pontifications? You can sit here and insult me all day long, it doesn't effect me. Is it making you feel better about yourself? Do you think it's impressing other people? So what is your purpose?

There is no such thing as "God's Logic" and it has nothing to do with 2+2 or my mental stability. It also has nothing to do with whether there is or isn't a God. The term "God's Logic" is simply your way of elevating human logic and making it seem more important than it really is. You feel the need to do this in order to make your argument more valid but it only serves to demonstrate your arrogance.

The only "proof" for God is faith in God. The "evidence" for God is quite simple, man exists. If there were no such thing as God, man couldn't exist. We're too smart for our own good. With our level of ingenuity and imagination, the world would have been destroyed in chaos without something to reel us back in and humble us. So you are making a completely unnecessary complex argument when the argument is really very simple. Then you are condemning people for not going along with your complex argument by repeatedly beating them down with insults. This has resulted in getting you nowhere, in fact, you have actually LOST ground in this debate.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

So we can add another poster who came here in earnest that these two charlatan scumbags couldn't refrain from ad homming like a couple of prissy teenagers.

How many does that make, now?

I lost track around ten.

Yes, the number of people who they feel inclined to malign, insult, denigrate, lie about what was said and claim are "phonies" continues to grow. And it doesn't really seem to matter if they believe in a spiritual God or not... that's the amazing part. Rawlings continues to claim he has proven his argument but the only poster who seems to be totally convinced is Justin. Emily, bless her heart, keeps trying to reel them back into sanity and civility, but it doesn't seem to be working.

Like I said before, keep these two away from box cutters and airlines.

The Self-Deluded Boss ≠ Boss, but = a Tiny Little god (Boss) in the Gap


Bottom line: your position, while trying to simultaneously assert theism. is especially untenable, bizarre, crazy, stupid! There is a reason that in the history of theism virtually no one, except for cultish space cadets, hold to your nonsense! It undermines and contradicts theism, you idiot! Indeed, there's no way in hell that BreezeWood could sensibly agree with you. Your notion would most especially overthrow pantheism/panentheism!

And, in the meantime, Amrchaos just exposed the irrationality of your notion . . . though he himself doesn't grasp the full ramifications, i.e., that he just proved the cognitive facts of the TAG regarding God's existence and the necessity that God bestowed His logic on us; more at, we cannot rationally explain how the logic we have would not universally hold. There has to be an all-encompassing "operating system", Boss, whether it be nature or God.

Just because you cannot apprehend that the denial of that is incoherent, inherently contradictory, self-negating and, therefore, positively proves the opposite of what you irrationally claim to be true is your problem, not mine. The fact that you necessarily, indeed, that we all must necessarily, presuppose that the laws of thought universally hold at all levels of being whenever we assert anything at all just flies right over you head.

That's all. That's your problem, not mine.

Indeed, self-deluded one, even seallybobo, GT and others instinctively understand that. The reality of the matter is that everyone of us rejected your crazy subjective-objective dichotomy and your 2 + 2 = 4 analogy earlier on this thread.

We all know that's true. You know that's true. And Emily does not agree with you either, self-deluded one, on this point.

I can go back and quote the posts in which seallybobo, GT, Justin, I and others, including even Hollie, amazingly enough, one of the few things she's gotten right, in which we all refuted you . . . so stop pretending that your bull is flying around here. GT also knows this to be true on the basis of our joint refutation of QW's computer analogy which is essentially the very same bullshit.

Everybody on this board knows that your split, incoherent paradigm for cognitive reality has been devastatingly refuted by me, whether one believes God exists or not.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

This has resulted in getting you nowhere, in fact, you have actually LOST ground in this debate.

The Cultish, Self-Deluded and Self-Brainwashed Boss ≠ Boss, but = a Tiny Little god (Boss) in the Gap, has Nothing Now but My Utter Contempt!

Bottom line: your position, while trying to simultaneously assert theism. is especially untenable, bizarre, crazy, stupid! There is a reason that in the history of theism virtually no one, except for cultish space cadets like you, hold to this nonsense! It undermines and contradicts theism, you idiot! Indeed, there's no way in hell that BreezeWood could sensibly agree with you. Your notion would most especially overthrow pantheism/panentheism!

And, in the meantime, Amrchaos just exposed the irrationality of your notion . . . though he himself doesn't grasp the full ramifications, i.e., that he just proved the cognitive facts of the TAG regarding God's existence and the necessity that God bestowed His logic on us; more at, we cannot rationally explain how the logic we have would not universally hold. There has to be an all-encompassing "operating system", Boss, whether it be nature or God.

Just because you cannot apprehend that the denial of that is incoherent, inherently contradictory, self-negating and, therefore, positively proves the opposite of what you irrationally claim to be true is your problem, not mine. The fact that you necessarily, indeed, that we all must necessarily, presuppose that the laws of thought universally hold at all levels of being whenever we assert anything at all just flies right over you head.

That's all. That's your problem, not mine.

Indeed, self-deluded one, even seallybobo, GT and others instinctively understand that. The reality of the matter is that everyone of us rejected your crazy subjective-objective dichotomy and your 2 + 2 = 4 analogy earlier on this thread.

We all know that's true. You know that's true. And Emily does not agree with you either, self-deluded one, on this point.

I can go back and quote the posts in which seallybobo, GT, Justin, I and others, including even Hollie, amazingly enough, one of the few things she's gotten right, in which we all refuted you . . . so stop pretending that your bull is flying around here. GT also knows this to be true on the basis of our joint refutation of QW's computer analogy which is essentially the very same bullshit.

Everybody on this board knows that your split, incoherent paradigm for cognitive reality has been devastatingly refuted by me, whether one believes God exists or not.