Freethinker.nl

rana schreef:Source(s):
every `1 is already Blind in this world and if you will follow another Blind then you both will fall in hole. so try to follow that person who have Spiritual Eyes who can Guide you on Actual Right Path. ( my Authority & Guide is my Spiritual Master " Srila Prabhupada " )

No wonder your thinking is so muddled. Your spiritual teacher is able to first assert that everyone is blind and therefore you must never follow another person, and in the next sentence tell you to follow him. How simple-minded can one be not to notice this contradiction in terms.

dikkemick schreef:@Rana
A famous Clint Eastwood quote: "Opinions are like assholes. Everybody has one"
And we are rather not suggesting opinions, we're talking facts and/or logic. And fact is indeed: We're gonna die. You and I. And I never talked to someone who died and did come back to tell me.
People desperately want this and there are tons of religions and opinions abouth a second life, a here-after, a nirvana.
But try to focus on THIS life, because we're sure abouth that!
Don't blow yourself up because you're convinced you will get 72(?) virgins in the moslim heaven. Your idea is not any better/wiser!
UNLESS you can give us any facts.

fact is already here. and its an open challenge that : you recall everything which you have thought or done on each second within`1 cheap minute, go ahead and do it now.

otherwise there is no more meaning in beating the dead horse(s) like you. ( simply waste of time.)

Rereformed schreef:

rana schreef:Source(s):
every `1 is already Blind in this world and if you will follow another Blind then you both will fall in hole. so try to follow that person who have Spiritual Eyes who can Guide you on Actual Right Path. ( my Authority & Guide is my Spiritual Master " Srila Prabhupada " )

No wonder your thinking is so muddled. Your spiritual teacher is able to first assert that everyone is blind and therefore you must never follow another person, and in the next sentence tell you to follow him. How simple-minded can one be not to notice this contradiction in terms.

that is why i asked you for another verifiable and tangible explanation cuz right now you are simply **imposing** ( or shifitng burdon of proof ) your authority on us without explaining anything at all.

and who are you ? who are you ? are you another authority ? alright give me another verifiable and tangible explanation right now. so that i can start following you.

now simply explain your more verifiable and tangible explanation instead of **imposing** your authority on us. ( nonsense rascal )

Dat beloof ik schreef:We just think here is no such thing as a 'god'..

alright for example :Your father existed before your birth. you cannot say that before your birth your father don,t exists.

so how child will understand this thing that who is his real father cuz before his birth he never seen him. so would he will accept anyone else as his father ? or how child will understand this thing that who is his real father ? what is your answer ?

rana schreef: so how child will understand this thing that who is his real father cuz before his birth he never seen him. so would he will accept anyone else as his father ? or how child will understand this thing that who is his real father ? what is your answer ?

This is very easy
Normally a child wil believe that the man and woman who raise him are the parents unless they are told that this is not the case. Young geese follow the first thing after they have hatched.
For non ducklings or geese I found the answer in de holy book of wikipedia

DNA paternity testing is the use of DNA profiling (known as genetic fingerprinting) to determine whether two individuals are biologically parent and child. A paternity test establishes genetic proof whether a man is the biological father of an individual, and a maternity test establishes whether a woman is the biological mother of an individual. Tests can also determine the likelihood of someone being a biological grandparent to a grandchild.

doctorwho schreef:

rana schreef: so how child will understand this thing that who is his real father cuz before his birth he never seen him. so would he will accept anyone else as his father ? or how child will understand this thing that who is his real father ? what is your answer ?

This is very easy
Normally a child wil believe that the man and woman who raise him are the parents unless they are told that this is not the case. Young geese follow the first thing after they have hatched.
For non ducklings or geese I found the answer in de holy book of wikipedia

DNA paternity testing is the use of DNA profiling (known as genetic fingerprinting) to determine whether two individuals are biologically parent and child. A paternity test establishes genetic proof whether a man is the biological father of an individual, and a maternity test establishes whether a woman is the biological mother of an individual. Tests can also determine the likelihood of someone being a biological grandparent to a grandchild.

D.N.A test means you admit that you need help of your real mother. cuz you already dont know this thing that who is your real father. so in all respects you have to approach your real mother.

same you have to follow real authority. "Whatever You have spoken, I accept it," Then there is no difficulty.

Otherwise, if you makes research, "Who is my father?" go on searching for life; you'll never find your father.

Rana, you keep echoing your mantra(s). What we want is an explaination.

(Big city, Tol Hansse:
Hare Krishna's op de dam
Douwen in je hand een brieffie
Hoe je happy leven kan
Zo te zien en volgens mij
Zijn ze zelf niet zo blij)

rana schreef:

Dat beloof ik schreef:We just think here is no such thing as a 'god'..

alright for example :Your father existed before your birth. you cannot say that before your birth your father don,t exists.

so how child will understand this thing that who is his real father cuz before his birth he never seen him. so would he will accept anyone else as his father ? or how child will understand this thing that who is his real father ? what is your answer ?

My answer is that a child doesn't want to understand this.
A child is raised with the idea that one specific person is his father.
Children just accept this because they are told so.
When the child grows up and becomes an adult, sometimes he realises that his parents may not be his real biological parents.
Such a thing can happen when you start thinking for yourself, instead of accepting blindly what other people tell you. (singing hare krishna over and over again until you stop thinking).

rana schreef:that is why i asked you for another verifiable and tangible explanation cuz right now you are simply **imposing** ( or shifitng burdon of proof ) your authority on us without explaining anything at all.

and who are you ? who are you ? are you another authority ? alright give me another verifiable and tangible explanation right now. so that i can start following you.

now simply explain your more verifiable and tangible explanation instead of **imposing** your authority on us. ( nonsense rascal )

You are repeating yourself without pondering what your discussion partner wrote. Perhaps logical thinking is too difficult for you. Your way of discussing things reminds one of the five-year-old who says 'my father is the strongest'. The five-year-old hasn't the faintest idea how many fathers there are in the world and it doesn't occur to him that one cannot say such a thing unless his father has been compared with all the others and conclusively proven to be the strongest. The kid only speaks in this way because he has a psychological need to say so. In the same way your bragging about a god being a fact, having all the answers, total happiness and peace, is because you are very needy and insecure and you are desperately looking for happiness.

I am not in any way obliged to explain anything in this discussion because I haven't asserted things to believe in. You assert preposterous claims, among other things about a godhead Krishna, reincarnation, next life and the importance of abstaining from onions and garlic. The burden of proof always lies with the person who claims something. Your tactic of giving us challenges is completely beside the point.
I propose you start with proving the easiest and therefore most important claim: the danger of eating onions and garlic.

rana schreef:
D.N.A test means you admit that you need help of your real mother. cuz you already dont know this thing that who is your real father. so in all respects you have to approach your real mother.

same you have to follow real authority. "Whatever You have spoken, I accept it," Then there is no difficulty.

Otherwise, if you makes research, "Who is my father?" go on searching for life; you'll never find your father.

I give up you really don't get it and keep begging the question which is another fallacy on an ongoing list

rewrite this
bonjour

rewrite this
Bonjour

rana schreef:then why shall i listen to any street dog like you ? if you are not authority then dont pose like one. cuz you are just an street dog. that is all.

and if you think that you will become better logician by shifitng burdon of proof. then there is no more meaning in beating the dead horse like you. ( simply waste of time.)

There is only one who constantly shifts the burden of proof and that is you. You have claimed a bunch of assertions for which you have not given any evidence whatsoever.
The reason why you should listen to me is not because I am an authority. There ARE no authorities. It is childish to accept something on authority. The reason why you should listen to me is because I confront you with rationality. Rationality is not dependent on authority but on laws of reasoning and presenting evidence which any intelligent person can discern and cannot be withspoken. So the person who confronts you with that is of no importance, it can be anyone.
If you are not prepared to engage in rational arguments, but instead answer every person who reacts to you with insults then you only underscore your childishness (and by the way, sadly contradict your name). In that case we must conclude that this topic can be closed and you need to grow up before you can have another conversation on this forum. We thank you for giving us an excellent and entertaining illustration to which extent religious convictions can be void of any reasonableness without the believer ever noticing it. You offered us a truly educational experience.
May you find your happiness in avoiding illicit sex, eating beetroots, not understanding krsna, repeating endlessly your 16 rounds of 108 beads and offering a carrot to your guru once in a while. And may you learn to appreciate street dogs, horses and pigs. Otherwise you may be one of them in your next life!