An Alternative to Manmade Elixirs

Originally posted by CalJust
I shouldn't have included the "largest number" of the "non-interesting" group, I agree.

But it does work with the smallest number being moved across.

And we ARE talking about integers.

Agergs' explanation makes me tired by just looking at it!😀

Yes, he's right that argument works. What is more one can find an algorithm for the rationals, and all numbers which are solutions of polynomial equations. But it won't work for the transcendental numbers. Although see edit 3 (just made).

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Yes, please.

In future, please try being considerate of other forum members and only post the two relevant words rather than spamming the thread with unnecessary reposts.

Your OP asks whether I will consider an offer made by a fictional character called Jesus. I tried to explain that anyone who thinks the offer is real has probably already accepted the offer, so you must be addressing your question to people who think the offer is not real. So your first task is to convince us that it is real.
In our discussion so far, you have already admitted that you agree with me that when an offer is not thought to be genuine, one cannot even begin to consider it regardless of how open minded one professors to be.
So instead of asking who will consider the offer, why don't you try presenting some evidence that:
a) Jesus actually existed.
b) Jesus said the things attributed to him.
c) The offer he supposedly made was something he was capable of actioning.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Except that the moment you pick one, it must be pretty special to have gotten picked out of those uncountably infinite others. Just to even be able to define it makes it pretty special. The vast majority of reals can only be distinguished from each other by listing the infinite string of digits that makes them up, or by some other method requiring infinite time to communicate the information.

Haha ... good point twhitehead.

Originally posted by twhitehead
In future, please try being considerate of other forum members and only post the two relevant words rather than spamming the thread with unnecessary reposts.

Your OP asks whether I will consider an offer made by a fictional character called Jesus. I tried to explain that anyone who thinks the offer is real has probably already accepted the offer, so y ...[text shortened]... s attributed to him.
c) The offer he supposedly made was something he was capable of actioning.

Originally posted by twhitehead
"In our discussion so far, you have already admitted that you agree with me that when an offer [is not thought to be genuine], one cannot even begin to consider it regardless of how open minded one professors to be..."

"... is not thought to be genuine.. " Please read the reply again: "non-applicable". What specific "evidence" do you require?

Originally posted by Agerg
Haha ... good point twhitehead.

Agerg, would there be any spirituality related topic of interest to you or would you prefer to remain on the sidelines?

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Agerg, would there be any spirituality related topic of interest to you or would you prefer to remain on the sidelines?

Discussion between you and I that is interesting to both of us is unlikely ...

To you there is only the Bible and your interpretation of it.
As far as you're concerned there is only one permissible notion of "God" (namely the one you hold exists).
There is only one permissible set of properties that can be associated to that god (namely the ones you extrapolate from your own interpretation of your favourite version of the Bible).
You will not reconsider your current interpretation of the Bible, or your notion of "God" regardless of any data or argument that would challenge it - if something that you believe is shown to be illogical then "God" is above logic, or man cannot understand the ways of "God", and so on...
Your only means of evidence for any argument (even where scripture is inappropriate) will be scripture.
You think of "God" as an almost living, breathing entity, a being to be revered,
You want to convert people like me

I on the other hand see there are numerous different Bibles, all of which descendants of older writings about gods that have gone out of fashion, and other holy books which stand in competition to your Bible - none of which I hold in any higher regard than another
I do not believe your notion of "God" exists, moreover I find your notion of this entity untenable.
I do admit the possibility of an infinite set of distinctly different gods that might exist, and have no preference for any of them,
I admit an infinite set of properties or traits that can be mixed and matched to various extents in order to construct that set of gods.
I see no value in your scripture if it does not bear directly on an attribute claimed to be associated to your god, and of those times in which scripture is relevant, the proportion of which that are interesting to me is very small.
I think of "God" as a thing, a construct of human imagination.
I do not want to "find" "God"

Originally posted by Agerg
Discussion between you and I that is interesting to both of us is unlikely ...

To you there is only the Bible and your interpretation of it.
As far as you're concerned there is only one permissible notion of "God" (namely the one you hold exists).
There is only one permissible set of properties that can be associated to that god (namely the ones you ext ...[text shortened]... .
I think of "God" as a thing, a construct of human imagination.
I do not want to "find" "God"

"I do not want to "find" "God." Fine, Agerg. He respects your volition.
Is there anything you "want to find" before your physical death?

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
"I do not want to "find" "God." Fine, Agerg. He respects your volition.
Is there anything you "want to find" before your physical death?

At this present time, there is nothing I recall having misplaced.

Originally posted by twhitehead
What does respecting a view consist of? I for one have no intention of putting anyone here in the loony bin, not even dasa - unless his genocidal tendencies get too extreme.
But I have to point out that even personal experiences are not an open and shut case. We had one regular poster (I forget his name) who had had experiences that he interpreted as an ...[text shortened]... rom 'I have reason to believe a God exists' to 'everything I claim about God is therefore true'.

It may very well be. Your opinion on the matter doesn't change its validity.

True is true, no matter how many people refuse to believe it.

Originally posted by twhitehead
In this thread, my introduction of the IPU was not, as Suzzy interpreted it, an attack on other peoples religious beliefs, but rather a defense of my right to not believe everything and anything that some other person believes.

Grampy suggested that considering the offer in the OP was to be expected by someone with an open mind, so I demonstrated that ...[text shortened]... ting. In fact I see no indication whatsoever that either Grampy or Suzzy have got the point yet.

As I, for one, do not yet see any indication that you have gotten my point.

I said before that no believing is fine, we do have free will, after all, but one does not HAVE to insult while not believing.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
"... is not thought to be genuine.. " Please read the reply again: "non-applicable".

Same difference.

What specific "evidence" do you require?
Anything that might convince me that the offer is genuine. If I knew what evidence you had, I wouldn't be asking for it would I?

Originally posted by Suzianne
True is true, no matter how many people refuse to believe it.

I agree. Its such a pity though that you refuse to believe it.

Originally posted by Suzianne
As I, for one, do not yet see any indication that you have gotten my point.

I said before that no believing is fine, we do have free will, after all, but one does not HAVE to insult while not believing.

I did get your point (if it was as stated in your post). I must note however that I did not insult while not believing (not in this instance anyway). You on the other hand quite clearly intended to insult the IPU.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Is there anything you "want to find" before your physical death?

The sort of things one would want to 'find' in this context, are the sort of things one doesn't know one needs to find. The moment you start looking for it, you have essentially found it. And it would not be things that one has lost / misplaced in the past.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I did get your point (if it was as stated in your post). I must note however that I did not insult while not believing (not in this instance anyway). You on the other hand quite clearly intended to insult the IPU.

So, obviously you intend to continue.

So don't waste the time of either of us by being surprised that this conversation is over.