annabelfwlr Posted May 31, 2008 Group: Members Followers: 1 Topic Count: 7 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 44 Content Per Day: 0.01 Reputation: 1 Days Won: 0 Joined: 04/24/2008 Status: Offline Birthday: 08/03/1989 Share Posted May 31, 2008 My friend, I find this post very telling. Would you rather debate for the fun of it instead of giving yourself a chance to open up to what the Gospel is? "Because debate is fun" is a statement which shows you are here merely for the entertainment value rather than to truly search out what God may have for you. Personally, I take minor offense that you would use this site merely for "fun" but I set that aside in the hope that you will find something of value here which is vastly more important than your personal entertainment. Think, friend, and seek. In Him, t. Amen, Brother Ted!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerioke Posted May 31, 2008 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 97 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 5,850 Content Per Day: 0.84 Reputation: 128 Days Won: 0 Joined: 03/19/2005 Status: Offline Birthday: 08/11/1911 Share Posted May 31, 2008 I believe the suitability of our universe invalidates atheism because, like in our natural world, if it doesn't get created, it doesn't exist. No, by that logic, it isn't the suitability of our universe that invalidates atheism, it is the existence of our universe that invalidates atheism. That is a separate matter. Whether or not our existence invalidates atheism is open for discussion, but the suitability of our universe doesn't prove or disprove anything. You'll argue about anything. I'll buy your comment that the existence of our universe invalidate atheism though. I'm glad you finally see the light. I clearly said "Whether or not our existence invalidates atheism is open for discussion". If your critical reading skills are really that bad you should seek help, but I suspect this was just another intellectually dishonest tactic, albeit a pathetically weak one. My point was that your argument that "if it doesn't get created, it doesn't exist" clearly doesn't address the suitability of our universe, but its existence. You are arguing a different point. I quoted you word for word. There is nothing wrong with my reading skills. Perhaps you should look into your writing skills. In the form that you've emphasized, the quote is clearly taken out of context; you'll notice I prefaced it with "by that logic". If you missed that, you do need to practice your critical reading. In any case, I think my meaning was clear: that "if it doesn't get created, it doesn't exist" doesn't address the suitability of our universe, but its existence, a different point entirely. If it doesn't get created, then there is no suitability whatsoever. The fact is that our universe is suited to life on Earth. Elsewhere has yet to be determined. You are arguing about a universe that doesn't exist. How goofy is that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerioke Posted June 1, 2008 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 97 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 5,850 Content Per Day: 0.84 Reputation: 128 Days Won: 0 Joined: 03/19/2005 Status: Offline Birthday: 08/11/1911 Share Posted June 1, 2008 I believe the suitability of our universe invalidates atheism because, like in our natural world, if it doesn't get created, it doesn't exist. No, by that logic, it isn't the suitability of our universe that invalidates atheism, it is the existence of our universe that invalidates atheism. That is a separate matter. Whether or not our existence invalidates atheism is open for discussion, but the suitability of our universe doesn't prove or disprove anything. You'll argue about anything. I'll buy your comment that the existence of our universe invalidate atheism though. I'm glad you finally see the light. I clearly said "Whether or not our existence invalidates atheism is open for discussion". If your critical reading skills are really that bad you should seek help, but I suspect this was just another intellectually dishonest tactic, albeit a pathetically weak one. My point was that your argument that "if it doesn't get created, it doesn't exist" clearly doesn't address the suitability of our universe, but its existence. You are arguing a different point. I quoted you word for word. There is nothing wrong with my reading skills. Perhaps you should look into your writing skills. In the form that you've emphasized, the quote is clearly taken out of context; you'll notice I prefaced it with "by that logic". If you missed that, you do need to practice your critical reading. In any case, I think my meaning was clear: that "if it doesn't get created, it doesn't exist" doesn't address the suitability of our universe, but its existence, a different point entirely. If it doesn't get created, then there is no suitability whatsoever. The fact is that our universe is suited to life on Earth. Elsewhere has yet to be determined. You are arguing about a universe that doesn't exist. How goofy is that? My point is that even if I were to agree that the existence of our universe invalidates atheism, the fact is that the suitability of our particular circumstances do not. They are two separate evidences. To me, creation is evidence of a Creator. To you, it's not. What's there to discuss? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerioke Posted June 2, 2008 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 97 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 5,850 Content Per Day: 0.84 Reputation: 128 Days Won: 0 Joined: 03/19/2005 Status: Offline Birthday: 08/11/1911 Share Posted June 2, 2008 To me, creation is evidence of a Creator. To you, it's not. What's there to discuss? It's really quite simple. Creation may be evidence of a Creator, but the suitability of our planet is not. Yer starting to sound like "blah blah blah". Making a lot of noise but not saying anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerioke Posted June 2, 2008 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 97 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 5,850 Content Per Day: 0.84 Reputation: 128 Days Won: 0 Joined: 03/19/2005 Status: Offline Birthday: 08/11/1911 Share Posted June 2, 2008 To me, creation is evidence of a Creator. To you, it's not. What's there to discuss? It's really quite simple. Creation may be evidence of a Creator, but the suitability of our planet is not. Yer starting to sound like "blah blah blah". Making a lot of noise but not saying anything. Real mature. I've made my point clear. Over and over again. It's still your opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerioke Posted June 2, 2008 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 97 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 5,850 Content Per Day: 0.84 Reputation: 128 Days Won: 0 Joined: 03/19/2005 Status: Offline Birthday: 08/11/1911 Share Posted June 2, 2008 To me, creation is evidence of a Creator. To you, it's not. What's there to discuss? It's really quite simple. Creation may be evidence of a Creator, but the suitability of our planet is not. Yer starting to sound like "blah blah blah". Making a lot of noise but not saying anything. Real mature. I've made my point clear. Over and over again. It's still your opinion. Some things are matters of opinion, others are matters of fact. Some things are matters of faith, others are matters of reason. This is the latter of both. Your point is that Creation = Creator, but what I keep trying to tell you is that that is an entirely different and argument to whether or not the suitability of our universe invalidates atheism. The fact that the arguments are separate is not a matter of opinion. Ok. You win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeinsarasota Posted June 2, 2008 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 3 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 187 Content Per Day: 0.03 Reputation: 7 Days Won: 0 Joined: 11/21/2007 Status: Offline Share Posted June 2, 2008 To me, creation is evidence of a Creator. To you, it's not. What's there to discuss? It's really quite simple. Creation may be evidence of a Creator, but the suitability of our planet is not. Yer starting to sound like "blah blah blah". Making a lot of noise but not saying anything. Real mature. I've made my point clear. Over and over again. It's still your opinion. Some things are matters of opinion, others are matters of fact. Some things are matters of faith, others are matters of reason. This is the latter of both. Your point is that Creation = Creator, but what I keep trying to tell you is that that is an entirely different and argument to whether or not the suitability of our universe invalidates atheism. The fact that the arguments are separate is not a matter of opinion. Ok. You win. Are you saying this because you can't and/or don't wish to expend the mental energy to understand what cache is saying and just want to be done with the conversation, or do you really admit to understanding and agree with cache? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerioke Posted June 3, 2008 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 97 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 5,850 Content Per Day: 0.84 Reputation: 128 Days Won: 0 Joined: 03/19/2005 Status: Offline Birthday: 08/11/1911 Share Posted June 3, 2008 To me, creation is evidence of a Creator. To you, it's not. What's there to discuss? It's really quite simple. Creation may be evidence of a Creator, but the suitability of our planet is not. Yer starting to sound like "blah blah blah". Making a lot of noise but not saying anything. Real mature. I've made my point clear. Over and over again. It's still your opinion. Some things are matters of opinion, others are matters of fact. Some things are matters of faith, others are matters of reason. This is the latter of both. Your point is that Creation = Creator, but what I keep trying to tell you is that that is an entirely different and argument to whether or not the suitability of our universe invalidates atheism. The fact that the arguments are separate is not a matter of opinion. Ok. You win. Are you saying this because you can't and/or don't wish to expend the mental energy to understand what cache is saying and just want to be done with the conversation, or do you really admit to understanding and agree with cache? I don't agree with him. I just don't like being nagged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeinsarasota Posted June 3, 2008 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 3 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 187 Content Per Day: 0.03 Reputation: 7 Days Won: 0 Joined: 11/21/2007 Status: Offline Share Posted June 3, 2008 To me, creation is evidence of a Creator. To you, it's not. What's there to discuss? It's really quite simple. Creation may be evidence of a Creator, but the suitability of our planet is not. Yer starting to sound like "blah blah blah". Making a lot of noise but not saying anything. Real mature. I've made my point clear. Over and over again. It's still your opinion. Some things are matters of opinion, others are matters of fact. Some things are matters of faith, others are matters of reason. This is the latter of both. Your point is that Creation = Creator, but what I keep trying to tell you is that that is an entirely different and argument to whether or not the suitability of our universe invalidates atheism. The fact that the arguments are separate is not a matter of opinion. Ok. You win. Are you saying this because you can't and/or don't wish to expend the mental energy to understand what cache is saying and just want to be done with the conversation, or do you really admit to understanding and agree with cache? I don't agree with him. I just don't like being nagged. I know, right? People wanting you to think all the time. What's up with that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerioke Posted June 3, 2008 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 97 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 5,850 Content Per Day: 0.84 Reputation: 128 Days Won: 0 Joined: 03/19/2005 Status: Offline Birthday: 08/11/1911 Share Posted June 3, 2008 To me, creation is evidence of a Creator. To you, it's not. What's there to discuss? It's really quite simple. Creation may be evidence of a Creator, but the suitability of our planet is not. Yer starting to sound like "blah blah blah". Making a lot of noise but not saying anything. Real mature. I've made my point clear. Over and over again. It's still your opinion. Some things are matters of opinion, others are matters of fact. Some things are matters of faith, others are matters of reason. This is the latter of both. Your point is that Creation = Creator, but what I keep trying to tell you is that that is an entirely different and argument to whether or not the suitability of our universe invalidates atheism. The fact that the arguments are separate is not a matter of opinion. Ok. You win. Are you saying this because you can't and/or don't wish to expend the mental energy to understand what cache is saying and just want to be done with the conversation, or do you really admit to understanding and agree with cache? I don't agree with him. I just don't like being nagged. I know, right? People wanting you to think all the time. What's up with that? I dunno Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts