Does God Exist?

@spendius,

Quote:

polite and reasonable

?

ROFLMAO He doesn't realize his own ignorance! He thinks his guesses are more important than the information most people have come to understand as factual and widespread. Those two words used together is an oxymoron - in his case.

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

Quote:
polite and reasonable
?

ROFLMAO He doesn't realize his own ignorance! He thinks his guesses are more important than the information most people have come to understand as factual and widespread. Those two words used together is an oxymoron - in his case.

Obviously, as I have mentioned to ci before...he does not know the meaning of oxymoron...and misuses it regularly.

Anyway...I guess he does not realize that as my bitch, it is rude of him to call me ignorant.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

He thinks his guesses are more important than the information most people have come to understand as factual and widespread. Those two words used together is an oxymoron - in his case.

I'm not sure what you mean but my guess would be that most people think that it is factual and well understood that a God created everything but I think Frank has a different type of guess about that.
Would that be considered a hypothesis? An educated guess? I guess that those who believe in a God where educated or brain washed into believing in God. I like Frank's guess better.

1 Reply

@reasoning logic,

That's your choice, and it proves what philosophy teaches. That any assertion that an individual believes is their proof. "Belief and proof" are not one dimensional.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

any assertion that an individual believes is their proof. "Belief and proof" are not one dimensional.

Maybe not but the way you stated it, they seem to be the one and same

2 Replies

0 Replies

@reasoning logic,

That's because not everyone's belief and proof are the same. Have you ever served on a jury?

0 Replies

@reasoning logic,

There may have been tidal waves. But Romeo finds it reasonable that a celestial object may have been involved. Do you have some special insight you'd like to share, RL?

2 Replies

@neologist,

Perhaps it was the spaceship that brought him here

1 Reply

@Calamity Dal,

Do you wonder if RF and RL might have been fellow passengers?

1 Reply

@reasoning logic,

reasoning logic wrote:

Quote:
any assertion that an individual believes is their proof. "Belief and proof" are not one dimensional.

Maybe not but the way you stated it, they seem to be the one and same

Indeed it does.

ci's statement, "That's your choice, and it proves what philosophy teaches. That any assertion that an individual believes is their proof"...has to be one of the most ill-conceived pieces of fluff anyone has ever posted in a thread of this sort.

0 Replies

Quote:

Neologist said (re Asimovs 'meteor caused the Flood' theory): Romeo finds it reasonable that a celestial object may have been involved

I never said the theory was 'reasonable'!
It's a naughty step offence to put words in peoples mouths that they never said.
I think I heard somewhere that it's called false witness.. Wink

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/ten-cs_zps69eb00e9.jpg~original

2 Replies

@Romeo Fabulini,

Quote:

It's a naughty step offence to put words in my mouth that i never said. Some might even call it false witness

Then the author of the bible is gonna have you on the naughty step for a long long time

0 Replies

@neologist,

perhaps it was a colonisation attempt cause I count many

0 Replies

@Romeo Fabulini,

Romeo Fabulini wrote:

Quote:
Neologist said (re Asimovs 'meteor caused the Flood' theory): Romeo finds it reasonable that a celestial object may have been involved
I never said the theory was 'reasonable'!
It's a naughty step offence to put words in peoples mouths that they never said.
I think I heard somewhere that it's called false witness..

Then why introduce the idea into the conversation?

0 Replies

@neologist,

Quote:

There may have been tidal waves. But Romeo finds it reasonable that a celestial object may have been involved. Do you have some special insight you'd like to share, RL?

We can all observe objective celestial objects but not all of us can observe a spiritual celestial or make-believe God. Why?

2 Replies

@reasoning logic,

Perhaps your question cannot be answered because it is not a question. It is a statement indicating something profound ............

1 Reply

@neologist,

It's a question; a simple one.

The FACTS are that many do "see and believe" in an invisible god. Whether Hindus in India , Muslims in the Middle East, Jews, Catholics, Christians, or Buddhists around the world, (many have statues or icons).

That is the PROOF. There is no way to deny this proof.

1 Reply

@reasoning logic,

Quote:

We can all observe objective celestial objects but not all of us can observe a spiritual celestial or make-believe God. Why?

Because you have chosen not to do for a personal reason and you are now committed to continue.

0 Replies

1 Reply

Does God Exist?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know