Is Dungeons and Dragons

[timor]

Quote[/b] (Jango @ Mar. 24 2004,7:16)]

Quote[/b] ]
on the D&D topic for some people yes it could have caused them to commit suicide but only because they were mentally troubled for 99.9999% of all gamers who are not (as) mentally troubled its just a game

Wow, that's a big percent. Can you show me where you got it? I'd like to see the website.

Dude, he's just making a point.











It's probably higher.

 

[Miscellaneous]

Quote[/b] (timor @ Mar. 25 2004,3:12)]

Quote[/b] (Miscellaneous @ Mar. 24 2004,8:50)]

Quote[/b] (timor @ Mar. 16 2004,2:27)]I love to see Christians with brains. Thank you guys for being so rational.

What do you mean by "rational," Timor?  As opposed to "unrational?"  

How are you using these words?

(this is not a joke)

As opposed to "irrational."

I'm using them in the normal, unadulterated form of everyday English...

I'm asking you to define it. I don't understand how in your world made up of chance, you can assert "rationality." Rationality presupposes a set connection, and an orderlyness. Your worldview doesnt' account for this. Actually, it goes against it.

 

[timor]

Quote[/b] (Miscellaneous @ Mar. 25 2004,4:43)]

Quote[/b] (timor @ Mar. 25 2004,3:12)]

Quote[/b] (Miscellaneous @ Mar. 24 2004,8:50)]

Quote[/b] (timor @ Mar. 16 2004,2:27)]I love to see Christians with brains. Thank you guys for being so rational.

What do you mean by "rational," Timor? As opposed to "unrational?"

How are you using these words?

(this is not a joke)

As opposed to "irrational."

I'm using them in the normal, unadulterated form of everyday English...

I'm asking you to define it. I don't understand how in your world made up of chance, you can assert "rationality." Rationality presupposes a set connection, and an orderlyness. Your worldview doesnt' account for this. Actually, it goes against it.

Why? You're making such bold assertions regarding my worldview -- please enlighten me, tell me a bit more about my thoughts.

 

[Dr. Tek]

I believe he means that saying you do not believe in God is irrational.  You can not truly state that you believe there is nothing out htere, not hte way the mind works.  What you do is choose to remain ignorant of God by saying there isnt one.  Take offense if you may, but someone who claims something that is irrational like the above, usually is not believed when they start using terminology otherwise from that.  At least thats my take from everything thats been posted. Im not one for appeasement of contraditional theories of "tolerance," and if you dont like what I said, live with it, be gald someone says it. I used to an aethist and a diehard for evolution, and no one ever said anything, but I wish someone had, might have been less painful everything I went thru then.  Aside from that, Ive been thru this debate time and time again, and dont feel like re-posting everything, so I'll just stay out of this one

 

[timor]

Well Dr. Tek, I used to be a "die-hard" Christian. In fact, you can read a bit of my story here:

http://www.tinyurl.com/xlgr

To say that I am irrational for not believing in "god" is absolutely ridiculous. God has yet to even be sufficiently defined, and is a therefore meaningless term. Why would I believe in a meaningless term? If you're referring to the Judeo-Christian God, we run into all sorts of problems - self contradictory traits, Biblical errancy and absurdity, and the like.

And yet, the burden of proof is on you, because you've made the claim that atheism is irrational. Both you and Miscellaneous have, actually. Please don't stay out of this debate, since you've actually started it.

So, I say it again -- the burden of proof is on the theists. Why is my worldview so absurd -- that is, why should I believe in God?

Please do not make any appeals to wonder, as they will be quickly puked upon and then discarded. In fact, please try to refrain from logical fallacies as a whole, since Miscellaneous has implied that your worldview is so much more rational (read: logical) than mine. So here's your chance, people. Why, oh why, should I believe in God? And remember, because "god" is such an ambiguous term and means many things to many people, please define "god" first. Commence!

 

[Dr. Tek]

Always amazes me how many people state their are contradictions, yet they can never list ONE credible one.

Anyways, look around you. Look at yourself. Only a fool can think something so complex as life was an accident, some random chance. If you actually say that, then you are no more then an ignorant fool who does not want to admit responsibility ot a creator. Your statement you "were" a christian is obviously flawed, since one who truly believes the truth would not give it up. Sounds more like you were some apostate church-goer.

The absurdity is the statement of "no" belief in God. You do, you just CHOOSE to remain ignorant of it.

 

[Miscellaneous]

Quote[/b] (timor @ Mar. 25 2004,6:02)]

Quote[/b] (Miscellaneous @ Mar. 25 2004,4:43)]

Quote[/b] (timor @ Mar. 25 2004,3:12)]

Quote[/b] (Miscellaneous @ Mar. 24 2004,8:50)]

Quote[/b] (timor @ Mar. 16 2004,2:27)]I love to see Christians with brains. Thank you guys for being so rational.

What do you mean by "rational," Timor?  As opposed to "unrational?"  

How are you using these words?

(this is not a joke)

As opposed to "irrational."

I'm using them in the normal, unadulterated form of everyday English...

I'm asking you to define it.  I don't understand how in your world made up of chance, you can assert "rationality."  Rationality presupposes a set connection, and an orderlyness.  Your worldview doesnt' account for this.  Actually, it goes against it.

Why? You're making such bold assertions regarding my worldview -- please enlighten me, tell me a bit more about my thoughts.

You don't believe in God.  Rather, you convince yourself that God doesn't exist, when you do in fact believe in him.  You try to supress this knowledge (Rom 1:18ff).  You fail, because reality is metaphysically connected with God in the sense that reality is, because it is through him.  In Christ we move and have our being, as Paul states.  The only way for you to know anything then, is by first knowing God.  Facts are what they are because of their relationship to God.  In this sense, you do know things, but only because you are being inconsistent.  For to know anything is to first know God, and recognize Him as God.  Therefore you are inconsistent because you must affirm God to try deny God.  Like air: we can sit here all day and talk to each other and argue over whether there is air.  In the end, if you are denying it, you are still taking it in.  You are using it to inturn deny it, affirming it's existence.  

If you were consistent, you wouldn't know any thing about facts.  Because in the atheistic worldview, there are no facts.  Nothing can be known about anything.  Therefore, you have no basis for "rationality." In the anti-theists worldview, things happen by chance.  There is either no particulars, or there are no universals in the world.  This is the philosophical problem of the one and the many.  Your worldview thus doesn't account for "rationality."  Your worldview does not account for "logic" (as you so kindly termed it).  This is what I'm saying.  You argue that Christianity has "logical fallacies" and I am saying you must first define this.  Because I'm saying that to argue that Christianity has "logical fallacies" you must first presuppose Christianity in order to know logical fallacies. In order to know anything. Therefore you must first presuppose what you are trying to disprove -- hence, being inconsistent.

You will here say that I have already presupposed my conclusion. I am presupposing that Christianity is true in my argument. This is true. However if you disagree with me, you thus have presupposed that Christianity is not true. The argument between Christianity and atheism is one of world-views.  An argument against ultimate authorities -- The Christian claiming that God is the ultimate authority, and we must base our truth in him, and the nonChristian saying that himself is his ultimate authority.

For a definition of God, the Bible gives a nice "multiple page" definition, if you will.  God is a simple being.  His being and his attributes are the same.  He is Epistemologically, morally, and ontologically self sufficient.   He is an Eternal being.  He is an infinite being.  He is supra and supertemperal.  He is omniscient, omnibenevolent, and omnijudicial.  He is omnipotent, or Sovereign and governs all that comes to pass.  Everything that comes to pass does so because it does so through him.  Everything that is, is because it's through him.  Facts are known because of their relationship with God. We can know these facts because of our metaphysical relationship to God. In his light, we see light, as the psalmist says. Things are related and universal in the sense that they are part of God's eternal plan. Things are particulars in the sense as they are objects created by God.

I could obviously go on, but books have been written that would do a much better job explaining it, in many more thousands of words than I have; hence, much more thorough.

 

[timor]

I said no appeals to wonder. You also threw in a few ad hominems -- "Only a fool..." "then you are no more than an ignorant fool..."

You also say that I was obviously not a Christian...WHICH MEANS YOU OBVIOUSLY DID NOT READ THE LINK I GAVE YOU! Did you not read it? CCGR, I'm biting my cyber tongue, here. Some apostate church-goer? Wow, this makes me so mad. I was a very devout Christian, even considering seminary at one time. My perpetual independant studies eventually led me to see through the claims of Christianity.

Stop making blind assumptions about me! Not only do you say I was never a Christian, you say that I CHOOSE to remain ignorant of God's existence. It sounds like you're saying that, deep down, I believe in God, I just don't want to admit it. Well Dr. Tek, I hate to tell you, but deep down, you don't really believe in God, you just don't want to admit it.

How does life's complexity prove that there is a creator? That is nothing more than an appeal to wonder. Besides, when life originally arose, it was not as complex as some organisms are today -- and today, there exist some very simple organisms!

I like how you threw the word "credible" into your first sentence. What exactly is "credible" to you? Absolutely nothing that has to do with evolution, or logic, or any of the flat-out contradictions in the Bible, I'm sure. And yet you find the idea of a garden of paradise with a talking snake and a Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil to be "credible" rather than mythology. You are a backwards man. Anyways, how about you go through and explain each of these 29 contradictions? If you are actually able to do so, which you won't be, I'll give you a bigger list.

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/short.html

Dr. Tek, this is a pointless discussion, as your are obviously completely devoid of the ability to form a cogent argument. You claim to have been an atheist, but (and I'm going into Dr.Tek-retarded-assumption mode here), based upon your total lack of reason, I'm guessing you were nothing more than a "rebellious" apatheist. You say no one who truly believed the "truth" would not give it up. I say, no one who ever really had use of their brain would ever give it up.

 

[Miscellaneous]

Quote[/b] ]You also threw in a few ad hominems -- "Only a fool..." "then you are no more than an ignorant fool..."

 

The Bible uses the term "fool" for atheists.  Because they know that God is, yet they suppress him.  They are ignorant, because of their attempted suppression of their unignorance.

It's not an ad hominem.  Their definitions say that much.

Quote[/b] ]You also say that I was obviously not a Christian...WHICH MEANS YOU OBVIOUSLY DID NOT READ THE LINK I GAVE YOU! Did you not read it? CCGR, I'm biting my cyber tongue, here. Some apostate church-goer? Wow, this makes me so mad. I was a very devout Christian, even considering seminary at one time. My perpetual independant studies eventually led me to see through the claims of Christianity

According to the Bible:

John 10:27-29
27 My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me;
28 and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand.
29 My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand.

Philippians 1:6
6 For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus.

And:

1 John 2:19
19 They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they all are not of us.

One doesn't undo his Christianity.  One doesn't lose his Christianity, because it isn't based on him, but on Christ, and Christ's blood and the regeneration of the Holy Spirt enabling one to believe, making a new the person within.

Quote[/b] ]Well Dr. Tek, I hate to tell you, but deep down, you don't really believe in God, you just don't want to admit it.

Romans 1:18ff.

By you saying this, you have not only supposed that you don't believe in God, but you also are suggesting that Christianity is entirely false, and that it's that obvious!!  

Once again, this is the antithesis, it should be noted the opposing worldview and presuppositions.

 

[timor]

Quote[/b] ]
You don't believe in God.  Rather, you convince yourself that God doesn't exist, when you do in fact believe in him.  You try to supress this knowledge (Rom 1:18ff).  You fail, because reality is metaphysically connected with God in the sense that reality is, because it is through him.

What is it with you people and telling me what I do and do not believe? This is ####ing ridiculous, I'm sorry. CCGR, go ahead and edit that if you want, but do you see what these people are saying? It's absolutely absurd.

Miscellaneous, you don't really believe in God. You see, you voncinve yourself that he exists, when you don't in fact believe in him. You fabricate knowledge about him. Ultimately you fail, because he simply make no sense at all. In fact, you can't even define him!

Quote[/b] ] In Christ we move and have our being, as Paul states.  The only way for you to know anything then, is by first knowing God. Facts are what they are because of their relationship to God.

And why should I trust Paul? Totally circular logic. I'm getting dizzy.

Quote[/b] ] In this sense, you do know things, but only because you are being inconsistent.  For to know anything is to first know God, and recognize Him as God.  Therefore you are inconsistent because you must affirm God to try deny God. Like air: we can sit here all day and talk to each other and argue over whether there is air.  In the end, if you are denying it, you are still taking it in.  You are using it to inturn deny it, affirming it's existence.  

You can make these assertions, but without giving even one reason why they should be taken seriously, I can't do anything but laugh.

Quote[/b] ]
If you were consistent, you wouldn't know any thing about facts.  Because in the atheistic worldview, there are no facts.  Nothing can be known about anything.  Therefore, you have no basis for "rationality."

You're compeltely making stuff up right now. This is coming straight from your butt to my computer screen. Why? You must explain why!

Quote[/b] ]In the anti-theists worldview, things happen by chance.

Yes, some things happen by chance, but not everything...stop making things up!

Quote[/b] ]There is either no particulars, or there are no universals in the world.

Sure there are, such as scientific laws. Oooh, the "s" word!

Quote[/b] ]This is the philosophical problem of the one and the many.  Your worldview thus doesn't account for "rationality."  Your worldview does not account for "logic" (as you so kindly termed it).

You're not giving any reasons for this. I can just as easily say the exact same thing about your worldview. In fact, I will. Your worldview doesn't account for "rationality" or "logic". There. I don't even have to give any reasons why, apparently. I just say it, and its true!

Quote[/b] ] You argue that Christianity has "logical fallacies" and I am saying you must first define this.  Because I'm saying that to argue that Christianity has "logical fallacies" you must first presuppose Christianity in order to know logical fallacies.  In order to know anything.  Therefore you must first presuppose what you are trying to disprove -- hence, being inconsistent.  

Blah blah blah, you're a a seriously broken record, but there are more problems than the pin.

Listen, I realize there's still another half to your post, but I've got to go, and its really not even worth wasting time over. I am seriously depressed that I belong to the same species as you -- I am going to go cry, then I'm going to bed.

 

[Miscellaneous]

Quote[/b] ]Previously I:

You don't believe in God.  Rather, you convince yourself that God doesn't exist, when you do in fact believe in him.  You try to supress this knowledge (Rom 1:18ff).  You fail, because reality is metaphysically connected with God in the sense that reality is, because it is through him.

Quote[/b] ]Timor:

What is it with you people and telling me what I do and do not believe? This is ####ing ridiculous, I'm sorry. CCGR, go ahead and edit that if you want, but do you see what these people are saying? It's absolutely absurd.

Again, The Bible says that you do.  Romans 1:18ff.  For you to say that you don't, is also to say that you are saying that the Bible is wrong, and that Christianity is false, and that it's "####ing ridiculous" to believe in it.  

You are presupposing your conclusion.  You later say that you are getting dizzy with the circular logic.  haha.  you are doing the same thing!  However, I'll explain why a little later, since you missed that reason in my post.

Quote[/b] ]Previously, I:

In Christ we move and have our being, as Paul states.  The only way for you to know anything then, is by first knowing God. Facts are what they are because of their relationship to God.

Quote[/b] ]Timor:

And why should I trust Paul? Totally circular logic. I'm getting dizzy.

You are dizzy then because you are walking in your own track.  ^_^ Read above.

Quote[/b] ] Previously, I:

In this sense, you do know things, but only because you are being inconsistent.  For to know anything is to first know God, and recognize Him as God.  Therefore you are inconsistent because you must affirm God to try deny God. Like air: we can sit here all day and talk to each other and argue over whether there is air.  In the end, if you are denying it, you are still taking it in.  You are using it to inturn deny it, affirming it's existence.  

Quote[/b] ]Timor:

You can make these assertions, but without giving even one reason why they should be taken seriously, I can't do anything but laugh.

I gave you plenty of reasons.  The Bible says this.  YOu will say that this reason isn't good enough, thus asking me to justify the Bible.  You are asking me to test to see whehter my "ultimate authority" is actually ultimate authority.  How am I to do that?  Whatever I would test my "ultimate authority" on, would have to be higher up.  This is a worldview argument, as I have said before.  You are not understanding the argument at all, when your respond like this.  I will explain further down.

Quote[/b] ]Previously, I:

If you were consistent, you wouldn't know any thing about facts.  Because in the atheistic worldview, there are no facts.  Nothing can be known about anything.  Therefore, you have no basis for "rationality."

Quote[/b] ]Timor:

You're compeltely making #### up right now. This is coming straight from your ass to my computer screen. Why? You must explain why!

Because the Bible says so.  

Quote[/b] ]Previously, I:

In the anti-theists worldview, things happen by chance.

Quote[/b] ]Timor:

Yes, some things happen by chance, but not everything...stop making things up!

I'm not making this up.  I want you to prove me wrong.  Explain how things don't happen by chance.

Quote[/b] ]Previously, I:

There is either no particulars, or there are no universals in the world.

Quote[/b] ]Timor:

Sure there are, such as scientific laws. Oooh, the "s" word!

There you go just assumign that the world is rational.  You are assuming that there is universality.  What is a "law" Timor?  Explain to me a scientific law, and I will show you that it is you are using induction, and you don't even have justification for that.  Ever heard of David Hume's problem of induction.  It's sort of like this.  How do you know that there is universality in the world?  You have never experienced it, so you must appeal to something "higher" if you are going to assume it.  You don't, since you are autonomous (or at least claim to be), so what are laws but nothing more than observations of things that happened a certain way?  For the Atheist, laws of science are more like a history of what happened, rather than a guarantee of what's going to happen.  For instance the "law" of gravity.  What guarantee do you have that there will be gravity in 10 seconds?  Because there was gravity in the past?  And in the past, there has been gravity in the past?  This would be using induction to prove induction, an obvious flaw.  Hence, Hume's problem of induction and refutation of the Atheists concept of universality.  

Explain to me what a "law" is Timor.  Oooh the "l" word.  Explain to me what "universality" is Timor. The "u" word. Because your "science" seems to be based upon a concept you don't even believe in.

Quote[/b] ]Previously, I:

This is the philosophical problem of the one and the many.  Your worldview thus doesn't account for "rationality."  Your worldview does not account for "logic" (as you so kindly termed it).

Quote[/b] ]Timor:

You're not giving any reasons for this. I can just as easily say the exact same thing about your worldview. In fact, I will. Your worldview doesn't account for "rationality" or "logic". There. I don't even have to give any reasons why, apparently. I just say it, and its true!

I explained how it did at the bottom of my post -- in my definition of God and how facts relate to him.  I have universality because things are how they are in relation to God's perfect plan.  I know logic because facts lie in God and he is unchanging. I know there is regularity because God created the world and he promises to sustain it as such.

Quote[/b] ]Previously, I:

You argue that Christianity has "logical fallacies" and I am saying you must first define this.  Because I'm saying that to argue that Christianity has "logical fallacies" you must first presuppose Christianity in order to know logical fallacies.  In order to know anything.  Therefore you must first presuppose what you are trying to disprove -- hence, being inconsistent.  

Quote[/b] ]Timor:

Blah blah blah, you're a a seriously broken record, but there are more problems than the pin.

You have avoiding my arguments since the beginning.  Trying to mock me, isn't an answering of my arguments.

Quote[/b] ]Timor:

Listen, I realize there's still another half to your post, but I've got to go, and its really not even worth wasting time over.

Of course arguing your worldview isn't worth wasting your time.  You would rather assume that you are correct!!  He in the dark is afriad of the light because it shows him his sin.

Quote[/b] ]Timor:

I am seriously depressed that I belong to the same species as you -- I am going to go cry, then I'm going to bed.

Of course you are!  The nonChristian should be depressed because he has no future exept that of damnation as long as he tries to be automonous.  He knows he's a creature of the Creator, yet he tries to make himself be in the position of the Creator, by trying to be autonomous.  He fails everytime though, and realizes he is breaking God's law and will be punished for it.

---

As for as you complaining about my circular logic.  This is where worldviews argue.  I am saying that you believe in God, because the Bible, my ultimate authority, says so.  You say that this is not the case.  My saying that you believe in God presupposes that God exists.  Your saying that you don't, presupposes that God does not.  Therefore both of our arguments are circular, because both of our shown ultimate authorities disagree.  Thereofre at bottom we don't agree on anything, and when we speak we appear to be "presupposing our conclusions" and being "circular."  This is an epistemological discussion though, adn arguments will be like that.  It isn't bad logic.  It's epistemological argumetns against ultimate authorities.  Here lies the antithesis.  

If this were merely it, we would have nothing more to say, because there would be no point of contact. However, my worldview says that you truly believe the Bible to be your ultimate authority as well.  My worldview says that we both share the same ultimate authority and you try to suppress yours and be autonomous.  However you fail, because in autonomy you could know nothing because you wouldn't have any relationship with anything.  The reason you know anything is because you know God (even while you deny him) and it is in Him where knowledge lies.  

For the remainder of the discussion, I will be attacking your worldview, and showing it's absurdity.  Please answer my questions above.  I really want to continue this discussion, so please don't shy away.

 

[Atown]

hey timor i read your conversion and story and stuff and i gotta a question: did u ever feel God??

 

[Narnia]

Quote[/b] (timor @ Mar. 25 2004,8:11)]You also say that I was obviously not a Christian...WHICH MEANS YOU OBVIOUSLY DID NOT READ THE LINK I GAVE YOU! Did you not read it? CCGR, I'm biting my cyber tongue, here. Some apostate church-goer? Wow, this makes me so mad. I was a very devout Christian, even considering seminary at one time. My perpetual independant studies eventually led me to see through the claims of Christianity.

Timor I did read your link and while only God (who doesn't exist in your mind) truly knows, I too doubt that you were ever a Christian. Please let me explain. You read and indeed even studied the Bible, you had no reason to doubt what you read,were taught by your grandparents,and heard preached in church. You made mental assent to all of this. Then doubts crept in, you started listening to other opinions, reading atheist arguments  and were convinced that  what you believed was untrue. Am I correct so far?

To be a Christian is much more than head knowledge. To be a Christian you must be born again, regenerated. I know you said you thought about seminary, which doesn't surprise me, you obviously enjoy studying and learning about things that interest you. But where was the gratitude to Christ for dying in your stead? Where was the admittance of guilt and the necessary repentance?

I am not looking for a debate because it really isn't  something I even need to know. If you have never truly been a Christian up until this point, that doesn't mean you will never be and if you are a Christian who has lost his way ,so to speak, God will find you and bring you back.
I just have one question for you. Why are you so angry?ok, more questions...and why are you  trying so hard to turn Christians away from their faith? What difference does it make to you if we believe in something that you don't? Dr. Tek and Miscellaneous aren't just trying to win an argument for sake of arguing, they are trying to bring you to Christ who we believe is the way, the truth and the life.

 

[LionOfJudah]

First of all i read the link and have visited infadel many a time.

As far as you being a Christian that is between you and God.

Now then i have known many people, that have been this "bible" thumper that you say you were. That have done the whole nine yards and then some, even going to seminary to realize, that they had been living a lie and that they were a fool and never did truely open their eyes.


Say what you may. God is real. He alone is why you live and breath. you dont like it? well too bad for you. He lets you live out of His Grace. You have rejected Him, and unfortantly for you, there is no Heaven only eternal hell. Timor you may want to watch the fine line that you are walking now my friend, you want to talk about circular logic, go look in a mirror. Man is the ultimate creation of circular logic, from an athesist point of view.

 

[Eon]

I can't believe that I take a two day time out and come back to find this kind of stuff waiting for me. I'm away for 48 hours and when I come back this place is full of the kind of senseless, reasonless, rah-rah that I came here to crush in the first place.

If you could only stand outside yourselves and read what's been posted here from an outside perspective! Miscellaneous - though I'm not an atheist, I'm a strong believer in scientific method. Believe that I have issues with your contentions - we're in the middle of Alpha at the moment, but tomorrow I'm due a break and I'll spend some of that time to point out the gaps in your arguments that are big enough to back a semi through. I'm surprised Timor hasn't schooled you already.


Eon

 

[Mahfrot]

I would just like to mention that the "short list of contradictions" is a pile of horse poop and certainly not contradictions at all when context is involved, and also when you take a look at another non-crappy translation of the Bible (i.e. KJV = crappy). If you'd like me to post an answer to each contradiction I'll be glad to do so...anything to crush whatever victory you atheists may think you've won.

And guys...do be careful about the whole eternal damnation thing...though that may be the reality, throwing that into a debate does nothing more than cause atheists to tune us out...it's like saying "oh yea, well if you don't believe me, glad I won't be going to hell like you." How would we like it if they did the same sorta thing?

 

[Eon]

I'll be laughing at you guys from Val's hall - trust me.

At least us Heathens can fight fire with fire!

Mahfrot - I'd be more interested in how you handle the disconnect between Old and New Testaments.

 

[Miscellaneous]

Quote[/b] (Eon @ Mar. 26 2004,6:03)]If you could only stand outside yourselves and read what's been posted here from an outside perspective! Miscellaneous - though I'm not an atheist, I'm a strong believer in scientific method. Believe that I have issues with your contentions - we're in the middle of Alpha at the moment, but tomorrow I'm due a break and I'll spend some of that time to point out the  gaps in your arguments that are big enough to back a semi through. I'm surprised Timor hasn't schooled you already.


Eon

Eon, I'm merely challenging Timor's claim that he has reason, science, and logic in an atheistic worldview. An atheist worldview actually goes against these things. I'm not saying that they don't exist. I'm saying that his worldview doesn't account for them, and by him believeing in them, he's being inconsistent. I don't understand where my gaps in my argument are, but I'll be waiting for your response.

 

[CCGR]

ok there are Christians and non Christians on this forum. Many of us proclaim to believe in God, understand that. Assume that we do until proven otherwise.

For those that are not Christian let's respect their beliefs even though we don't agree with it.

enough of this you do/don't believe in God stuff.

Timor get some rest and come back after you cool off

 

[timor]

Miscellaneous, you obviously have no idea what an ad hominem is. Regardless, all you do in each of your posts is quote the Bible to me. If I make a point, you say "Aaah, but the Bible says..."

You can't argue with somebody like you, so I'm not going to.