Rex wrote:
Evidence is subjective, what evidence does a blind man see?
It depends on what one is talking about. Not all evidence is "subjective."
Your confusion about this very matter shows why you have difficulty in interpreting matters of religion and science.
In making that statement and many others, RL is proving that he is entirely subjective -- objectivism is foreign to him and therefore he doesn't know how to discern between the two. He has the makings of a bad politician.
Lightwizard wrote:In making that statement and many others, RL is proving that he is entirely subjective -- objectivism is foreign to him and therefore he doesn't know how to discern between the two. He has the makings of a bad politician.
Purposefully ignoring God does not make one politically sound either...
Chumly wrote:Timber wow!
Rex take a science course in something, it might be fun!
Just because Timber writes an exhaustive reply does not automatically give his reply substance...
Oh, there's substance all right! You just can't see it, because you're looking through the lens of a fundamentalist christian; you are blinded by IDiocy.
Rex,
Has it ever occurred to you that the sum total of applicable human knowledge, as well as the people that dedicate their entire lives to the study of particular subjects which constitute this cornucopia of information and research, all the while constantly under rigorous peer scrutiny, might be right.....
..And your opinions, which are the subjective interpretations of one person, which seem to have no demonstrable foundation in reality, which thusly can not and do not hold up to any sort of scrutiny, might be wrong....?
Wait..no..of course you haven't.
Carry on.
RexRed wrote:Lightwizard wrote:In making that statement and many others, RL is proving that he is entirely subjective -- objectivism is foreign to him and therefore he doesn't know how to discern between the two. He has the makings of a bad politician.
Purposefully ignoring God does not make one politically sound either...
A ridiculous statement -- another non-sequitur which RL has seeming thinks he can pass off like it actually means anything.
It's the devise of someone totally bereft in creative writing skills to end a sentence with "..." In any university, that would get you can F on the any paper.
Doktor S wrote:Rex,
Has it ever occurred to you that the sum total of applicable human knowledge, as well as the people that dedicate their entire lives to the study of particular subjects which constitute this cornucopia of information and research, all the while constantly under rigorous peer scrutiny, might be right.....
..And your opinions, which are the subjective interpretations of one person, which seem to have no demonstrable foundation in reality, which thusly can not and do not hold up to any sort of scrutiny, might be wrong....?
Wait..no..of course you haven't.
Carry on.
Yes it has occurred to me but it also occurred to me that the creator of all things scientific cannot be studied scientifically.
cicerone imposter wrote:Oh, there's substance all right! You just can't see it, because you're looking through the lens of a fundamentalist christian; you are blinded by IDiocy.
And you are blinded by Gience.
Lightwizard wrote:RexRed wrote:Lightwizard wrote:In making that statement and many others, RL is proving that he is entirely subjective -- objectivism is foreign to him and therefore he doesn't know how to discern between the two. He has the makings of a bad politician.
Purposefully ignoring God does not make one politically sound either...
A ridiculous statement -- another non-sequitur which RL has seeming thinks he can pass off like it actually means anything.
It's the devise of someone totally bereft in creative writing skills to end a sentence with "..." In any university, that would get you can F on the any paper.
You have probably entertained the idea but I am not RL.
I have profound respect for RL because he too is a brother of Christ...
Neo seems to also have been touched by God but he denies it often I think...
Rex wrote:
And you are blinded by Gience.
Whatever that means! Your inability to understand the basics of common sense and logic says more about you than I could ever explain. Your kind of ignorance is universal; you continue to believe in a two thousand year old book with no evidence to support it except your imagination.
You're in a bad way, and don't even understand why.
Wendel seems religious but he doesn't claim it.
The rest of you are more religious than most.
Ros seems the most clinical and Set and FM seem the most studied.
And Rex is less studied and personal; can't seem to decipher the obvious difference between subjective religion and objective science.
cicerone imposter wrote:Rex wrote:
And you are blinded by Gience.
Whatever that means! Your inability to understand the basics of common sense and logic says more about you than I could ever explain. Your kind of ignorance is universal; you continue to believe in a two thousand year old book with no evidence to support it except your imagination.
You're in a bad way, and don't even understand why.
Giance, is science trying to be God...
cicerone imposter wrote:And Rex is less studied and personal; can't seem to decipher the obvious difference between subjective religion and objective science.
I am the spiritual one here... I have more knowledge about the spirit in my little finger than the lot of you...
Peace with God
1 Corinthians 12:7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.
8 For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;
9 To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;
10 To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:
11 But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.
