|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2016 7:55 am
 |
|
|
|
|
Hey Guys!
Some of you know that I hang out and post in the Morality and Religious forum quite a bit.
Some of you (used to) come there too and i know you're aware of namely Arcoon Effox who not only challenges our Christian faith by constantly informing us that our faith in Gods word is pointless as he tries to discredit the bible all the time, tries to show us how the bible can't be trusted nor can we trust our own understanding of what the bible says, and has even claimed that he himself is an expert on bible interpretation and feels that he has the authority to dictate to others the meaning of our sacred text.
I have researched the makings of a cult and cult leaders and Arcoon fits the description of a cult leader with his claim that he has more knowledge, better understanding, better experience and training and that his interpretations of the bible are correct and true while our interpretations are incorrect.
Arcoon is probably the lead debater in MR because he's able to appear knowledgeable , throwing out his logical fallacy accusations, mostly at Christians. And none of us really refute it because, well speaking for myself, i dont know enough about logical fallacies, how to point them out and refute them.
Well Arcoon has been challenged to debate by a former 40 year Atheist, Stan.
Stan has a very informative and helpful blog on Atheism and other subjects. It's called Atheism Analyzed
His coming to Gaia is an answered prayer as there is really noone in the MR forums refuting Arcoon and the other atheists.
Here is the link to the debate taking place in MR between Arcoon and Stan. It just feels good to see Arcoon try and wriggle out of having an actual debate with someone who is prepared to debate him. Our Atheist is so much more aggressive when taking on the ill prepared Christian stay-at-home-mommys. rolleyes
I have prayed for Arcoons salvation many times. I'm concerned about his soul, i care about him. But i do see a very unfair situation in the MR, it's totally unbalanced when it comes to Arcoon. Let him defend his worldview the way he demands Christians to defend theirs. Let an experienced debater expose him and his intellectual dishonesty and his bullying tactics.
And that is precisely the characteristics of a bully. Willing to fight the weaker, less experienced , who possess little knowledge about debate and detecting logical fallacies.
please be in prayer for Stan, grab some popcorn and watch this debate unfold. Stans shows clearly on his blog how Atheism can be considered a religion, how Atheists actually do have beliefs, and are aggressive bullies towards Christians.
this is taken from his website concerning Arcoon Effox:
"He is making the point exactly: Atheism is a VOID which contains no principles whatsoever. Empty. Except back-filled with half hate of authority, especially religion, and half self-righteous, arrogant, elitism based on nothing in particular."
He's offered the readers on his blog to come observe the debate here on Gaia as well. Activity at Gaia site
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2016 8:07 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2016 2:50 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2016 5:35 pm
|
|
|
|
Lady Kariel Thanks for sharing about this. I've come across Arcoon before and generally ignore him when he quotes me because I find debating takes a lot of time that I don't have. I hope he can see the problems with atheism and if you are also interacting with him, show him thisAn important quote: Quote: If the laws of logic are metaphysically dependent on God, it follows that every logical argument presupposes the existence of God. What this means is that every sound theistic argument not only proves the existence of God but also presupposes the existence of God, insofar as that argument depends on logical inference. Indeed, every unsound theistic argument presupposes the existence of God. And the same goes, naturally, for every antitheistic argument. The irony must not be missed: one can logically argue against God only if God exists.
i'll show him that link some time in the very near future.
the more i think about it and the thing that he claims about having "lack of belief" or disbelief and claiming not have any beliefs about God at all, from now on i just feel like saying "thanks for your opinion" .
Like, how can i have a discussion about God w/ someone who claims to have no beliefs about God? seems pointless.
There's no logic, no reason, nothing of intellectual value, nothing. |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2016 7:12 am
|
|
|
 |
SARL0 Lady Kariel Thanks for sharing about this. I've come across Arcoon before and generally ignore him when he quotes me because I find debating takes a lot of time that I don't have. I hope he can see the problems with atheism and if you are also interacting with him, show him thisAn important quote: Quote: If the laws of logic are metaphysically dependent on God, it follows that every logical argument presupposes the existence of God. What this means is that every sound theistic argument not only proves the existence of God but also presupposes the existence of God, insofar as that argument depends on logical inference. Indeed, every unsound theistic argument presupposes the existence of God. And the same goes, naturally, for every antitheistic argument. The irony must not be missed: one can logically argue against God only if God exists. i'll show him that link some time in the very near future. the more i think about it and the thing that he claims about having "lack of belief" or disbelief and claiming not have any beliefs about God at all, from now on i just feel like saying "thanks for your opinion" . Like, how can i have a discussion about God w/ someone who claims to have no beliefs about God? seems pointless. There's no logic, no reason, nothing of intellectual value, nothing.
Well that's exactly it. Some atheists don't just 'lack belief' but also are opposed to the idea of God, and they are therefore 'antitheists'. Trying to reason with them is pointless after a while because they will never accept God. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Sep 13, 2016 10:00 am
|
|
|
|
welp -
The debate thread w/ Arcoon got Locked by an Admin, not sure which one and not really surprised.
imo, Arcoon didn't really even show up to debate. y'know... the way he shows up to debate the Christian stay-at-home-moms. lol .
Actually Rumblestilskin did most of the debating, if you wanna call it that. and interestingly , Rumbles tone, use of memes and choice of word phrases is practically identical to Arcoon.
Here's what stan posted on his website to sum up what goes on in the Morality and Religious forum of Gaia:
"I recently went into the nether world of the Gaia site, into the realm of the mutated Atheist. I say mutated because at this forum they no longer accept any definition of Atheism which is not merely that Atheism is nothing, a void consisting not of rejection but only of being “not convinced”. Other definitions of Atheism are ridiculed, and any one presenting them is attacked by a swarm of what can be described only as the site’s flying monkeys, hurling epithets and insults competitively in the background. There are a couple of dominant types there who jump in on top of other conversations, driving the original commenter into complete silence, even though the person is a sympathetic Atheist, but apparently menial.
The environment is completely open, meaning chaotic in the form of total anarchy, with zero principles for any type of considered conversation. They do assert rules for you, but for them there are none whatsoever. The tone is uniformly derogatory and destruction is the goal. Any interloper who is the Other is to be driven out by force of the stench they encounter there.
To get a feel of the maturity level, the site has its users choose a doll cartoon for a personal icon, and then play dress-up, outfitting the doll with clothes, armor, weapons, and other cartoon equipment. Seriously. The denizens themselves use garbage speak with as many expletives as they can muster instead of any meaningful information or content. They also post large semi-animated cartoons with similar verbiage as they use, as if that makes points which they are unable to make, in their state of semi-literacy.
The person I wound up having the discussion with, if it could be called that, assured me that he would escalate the garbage talk, and that the cursing was fun. That’s why he does it; it’s fun. And of course, the level of supposedly objectionable and aggressive attacks on the dignity of the opponent is at its maximum when someone like myself shows up. I've seen Atheists like these barrel-bottom specimens before; I'm not affected by their antics.
Here’s how it works in an anarchy, where principles and civility are foreign. First, anything the Other says is met with hoots of derision and claims of fallacy, which claims are entirely false. The Other will never convince the Atheist to admit that, though. And the attacks do not relent because apparently such tactics do work on reasonable people who turn away from the trash and decay, and leave. The anarchy is left intact and has been purified by the attacks.
Second, any rebuttal by the Other regarding the many actual logic deviations and standard fallacies committed by a resident Atheist is shouted down or ignored.
Third, any attack on the hollow VOID that is Atheism is met with demands to reveal whatever worldview that the Other might have. That serves as the sole answer to the question, “what threshold principles do you use for your rejection of theism?” The answer that eventually was actually betrayed accidentally was that they require “fallacy free” arguments. But that "principle" is immediately falsified by their double standard and corruption of the meaning of the concept: “fallacy”. In Atheist anarchy, the Atheist cannot make a fallacious statement by definition (theirs, unspoken but obviously axiomatic): these Atheists speak only the Truth, by definition (theirs, unspoken, but obviously axiomatic). Further, the Other speaks in fallacies in any case the Atheist dictates that to be the case, i.e., whenever convenient for his retorts.
Also, the Atheist ignores any request for information, and constantly demands to be allowed to deprecate the worldview of the Other, rather than reveal his own. In fact, at this site they readily claim that Atheism is nothing at all, no worldview, no possible reason to connect the Atheist anarchic void of principles to the life-system of the Atheist. They defend that denial with vehemence and escalated filth-speech. This is the intellectual level of the site.
So of course the intellectual path of any conversation is straight into that bottomless hole which constitutes Atheism. They truly are a Lord of the Flies, anarchic and principle-free group which considers themselves to be automatically far superior to any Other who shows up. So of course the loud, filthy denigration and derogation is deserved, because the Other is really an “idiot”, as they constantly jeer.
I have described the week-long visit there as a visit to a huge, rotting mountain of noxious garbage which is inhabited… infested… with a large population of rats. The rats need the garbage; it is their garbage; they derive their essence from the garbage. They become the garbage. They defend the garbage and purify the garbage-kingdom population by attacking any non-rats with as much poisonous effluent as they can spew from their filthy maws. No non-rat would stay in such a fetid, toxic garbage dump. The population of rats is secured and they congratulate themselves on their superiority as the Other leaves the toxins for better air.
Now that’s just my opinion, regarding my experience. You are free to go there and read the thread and see for yourself. But join up and post there only with the thought of venturing into the reeking fumes of the decay of human culture, civility, respect and literacy, and those who aggressively defend it."
there's some comments to Stans most recent post about his activity here on Gaia debating the Atheists if you're interested in reading them here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
