Minds are for believing.

No it's not your claim it's my claim. So not a strawman.
The Bible and the story of Jesus propagates belief. It doesn't show that belief to be true.
Cooking uses observation and measurement. So what?
The mind and brain are analogous to computer hardware and software. Neither is useful without the other.
Can you show that a mind can exist independent of a brain?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I must beg to differ.
You have made some observations predicated on your own subjective opinions. That is not an argument.
Whose truth and whose reality? You seem reluctant to define those terms without bringing in your subjective religious beliefs. Therefore one must assume that what you deem to be "truth" and "reality", as well as your phrase "a believing mind" are all to be found only among those who accept your own subjective definition of what you deem Christianity to be.

That is nothing but personal opinion.
You did not answer my question. Whose morality do you have in mind?
I've answered that. So once again you introduce fallacies.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I must beg to differ.

That's doesn't diminish the truthfulness and reality of what I said. You have to actually say how and why what I said is wrong. And if not, then you're just playing word games with yourself.

You have made some observations predicated on your own subjective opinions. That is not an argument.

Strawman. No, rather I have made an argument has to how and why the truth and reality is known and you have not said one word to refute it.

Whose truth and whose reality? You seem reluctant to define those terms without bringing in your subjective religious beliefs. Therefore one must assume that what you deem to be "truth" and "reality", as well as your phrase "a believing mind" are all to be found only among those who accept your own subjective definition of what you deem Christianity to be.

The Original Believing Mind's logical truth, consciousness, existence, morals and reality. As ALL require and logically entail a Believing Mind in order to occur and exist. And you have said nothing that shows otherwise.

That is nothing but personal opinion.

No, that's according to the truth and reality's moral standard, as they exist and to suggest anything else is self-refuting.

You did not answer my question. Whose morality do you have in mind?

The Original Believing Mind's

I've answered that. So once again you introduce fallacies.

Evasion, no you didn't. So here is its again: Do you believe or disbelieve that Trump was president in 2019?
 
Actually the Bible and Quantum Mechanics do not suggests otherwise.
Neither the Bible nor Quantum Mechanics has anything to say about whether the mind is generated by that brain or not.
We know that brains die
. But we don't and can't know or experience a believing minds demise because a mind requires a living brain.
spam
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So you claim.
You have not as yet defined your terms. You simply resort to your own preconceived theological belief.s
You have yet to present an cogent argument for which the first requirement is to precisely define one's terms.
And what is this "Original Believing Mind" that you write of?
No. It's your personal opinion regarding truth and reality's moral standards
Again, what is this "Original Believing Mind" ? And how do we know it is the correct Original Believing Mind"? There may be others.
Off topic
I do not need to disbelieve or believe that Trump was president in 2019. It is an established fact. Just as I do not need to disbelieve or believe that the earth orbits the sun. That too, is an established fact.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You are going to have to say how and why it isn't true and logical, or you're not say anything. Saying it isn't true isn't a refutation.
Your nonsense has been shown to be wrong over and over again by numerous people in numerous threads.

The key thing is that you don't know what belief is and refuse to look up the word in a dictionary. If you actually tried to understand what belief is you might have a chance at understanding why you are so wrong.
 
Actually, he's saying what he said: repetition of an argument doesn't make it more true than the first time it was presented.

You have a script, and you stick to it - primarily because engaging any of the responses you get threatens to expose your duplicity (which everyone is familiar with by now)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You refuse to define what you understand by that statement.
Then that rules out any Supreme Being.
I am fully aware of the meaning of words. I am trying to get you to define your terms and you persistently refuse
That is a subjective opinion not an empirical fact.
You have yet to present a cogent argument.
Of course that is all your opinion. Nor have you defined whose morality you are citing.
Again that is purely your own subjective opinion.
Trump being president in 2019 and our heliocentric solar system are empirical facts. Belief has nothing to do with either.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I understand the statement to be true. Now, if you think it isn't true, then say why and how it isn't.
As you have not defined precisely what you understand you are requesting the impossible.
Here is what I said:
'Actually my argument is for how and why the truth and reality is known to us, because if a believing mind is the only thing capable of making the truth and reality known to us, then it is only a believing mind that can define the truth and reality.'
And you persist in refusing to define what you understand by "truth", "reality" and this "believing mind"
Why and who is that?
You tell us. You are the one who believes in some supernatural entity.
Okay, then stop pretending you don't and just get on with your critique.
If you would define your terms, I could.
This is what I said: If everything that exists started to exist and occur in and because of believing mind, then there must have be a Original Believing Mind in which everything that exists started.
Why?
If everything that exists and occurs in reality requires a believing mind to be known to exist or occur in reality.
What is reality?
So, if everything that is knowable; including its occurrence and existence requires a believing mind in order to be known or knowable, then nothing can be known to exist or occur outside of a believing mind.
That depends on what you are referencing.
Therefore, if you don't think this is true, then you need to show what is that you think can be known to exist without or outside of a believing mind and how you know it, since all your knowledge requires a believing mind in order for you to know it?
Until you define what a "believing mind" constitutes you are again requesting the impossible.
Strawman and projection.
You have expressed your opinion. Nothing more
I have, but you just have not started to even begin to refute it. Rather you have been wasting your time pretending that I haven't made an argument yet.
You have made no argument. You have unsubstantiated statements using terms you refuse to define.
Strawman. No, that's an absolute that morality exists and to suggest otherwise makes you immoral.
Whose morality?
A comment premised on empirical fact i.e. what you have written.
Okay, if there is another way that the truth and reality can be known to exist and occur without or outside of a believing mind., then say what that other way is and how it is known to you?
What is truth and what is reality? And whose truth and whose reality? And what constitutes a "believing mind"?
Evasion. Do you believe that Trump was president in 2019 or not?
I do not need to believe it. It is an empirical fact.
 
Strawman. Believing that God is the source of everything that exists and occurs is Christianity, as Christians don't pay much attention to what atheists say God and Christianity is, when they don't know Him to begin with.

I believe that even the physical is the result of a Believing Mind or in other words the physical is secondary to belief and a believing mind. But if physicality exists and occurs, then it must be the result of a Believing Mind, because outside of a believing mind nothing is known to exist or occur, including the physical and otherwise.
Lol. You really don't understand the difference between knowing about something existing, and actual physical existence, do you?
 
Are you being deliberately obtuse, or did you fail to read and understand what I wrote?

I said that you don't understand the difference between knowing about something existing, and actual physical existence.

Did you read what I wrote? Or, did you have difficulty understanding it?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I do wish you would stop using terms you clearly do not understand
What about people in comas? Are they still "believing minds"?
Whose God? And what concept of deity are you referencing?
Define your terms.
What is reality? Is your reality the same as that of a butterfly or a dog? Or even another human being?
Why? You do not explain you merely repeat.
Again, why?
What is reality and whose reality are you referencing? [see above]
That rules out supernatural entitites.
Yet I still have a mind. So where do I fit into your scheme?
What is truth and what is reality? Again, see above comments.
Whose morality?
What is truth and what is reality? You keep repeating these terms without defining them.
No. Belief is not required when dealing with empirical facts.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Strawman. But I do understand what a strawman is, as it is when you misrepresent me and then criticize your misrepresentation rather than my actual argument. Like you are doing right now.



Some people say that they were conscious while in a coma when they awoke.
However, if the "believing mind" is no longer present, then they are no longer present in the body.



The God that the truth, consciousness, existence, morality, reality and belief Originated, because all of these things that I am referring to exist and denote His Believing Mind.



Reality is the result of a Believing Mind. That's why we can only be conscious of reality in the NOW or present tense, because reality works like and is only knowable in and with a Believing Mind.



I said something that is true, so if you disagree with it, then it is your job to refute it. If not, then it must be true.

'If everything that exists started to exist and occur in and because of believing mind, then there must have be a Original Believing Mind in which everything that exists started.'



Evasion, because it is true, as if it were not true, then you would and could refute it, but you won't; just because you can't.





See above.



Actually, if reality exists and you don't know what reality is, then reality rules you out.



Yes, you have a unbelieving "mind". But a believing mind is necessary in order to know the truth and reality.



See above. And if you don't know the "truth and what is reality", then stop pretending that you do, because they will never reveal themselves to you in your unbelief (atheism).



God's morality, as morality's existence requires belief as well.



Do you believe that "empirical facts" exist in reality?
So there we have it. What a roundabout way to simply admit that all this is about your religion.

God's morality, as morality's existence requires belief as well.
 
Back
Top