This is the most ridicolous thing i have ever heard in my life......
What if i said i believe in a higher being that kills little boys, girls, ugly woman, etc........If such a thing doesnt exist, why are you on here countless hours debating the characteristics of something you know doesnt exist?
It is the most irrational thing i have heard.......If you believe a something doesnt exist, why should you care how we describe it?
The most stupid thing i have ever heard.
Appeal to motive... This is not a valid argument.
Why can't I point out flaws in what you believe in? I pointed out flaws in the bible and you didn't think that was irrational. I'm pointing out flaws in what you believe!!! Why is this hard to understand?!?
0
Quote Originally Posted by Rostos:
This is the most ridicolous thing i have ever heard in my life......
What if i said i believe in a higher being that kills little boys, girls, ugly woman, etc........If such a thing doesnt exist, why are you on here countless hours debating the characteristics of something you know doesnt exist?
It is the most irrational thing i have heard.......If you believe a something doesnt exist, why should you care how we describe it?
The most stupid thing i have ever heard.
Appeal to motive... This is not a valid argument.
Why can't I point out flaws in what you believe in? I pointed out flaws in the bible and you didn't think that was irrational. I'm pointing out flaws in what you believe!!! Why is this hard to understand?!?
Right now i dont have a girl friend, lets assume you know for a fact i dont have girl friend, however, i go and proceed to say that my girlfriend is an absolute stunner, very wealthy and is the kindest person in the world.
You know for a fact she doesnt exist, would you start to argue that you dont like her even though you know she doesnt exist?
Would you be spending countless hours debating that my girlfriend doesnt exist, then start to say you dont like her characteristics?
Your imaginary girlfriend isn't harmful to society!!!
0
Quote Originally Posted by Rostos:
Right now i dont have a girl friend, lets assume you know for a fact i dont have girl friend, however, i go and proceed to say that my girlfriend is an absolute stunner, very wealthy and is the kindest person in the world.
You know for a fact she doesnt exist, would you start to argue that you dont like her even though you know she doesnt exist?
Would you be spending countless hours debating that my girlfriend doesnt exist, then start to say you dont like her characteristics?
Your imaginary girlfriend isn't harmful to society!!!
Why can't I point out flaws in what you believe in? I pointed out flaws in the bible and you didn't think that was irrational. I'm pointing out flaws in what you believe!!! Why is this hard to understand?!?
If you know something doesnt exist, why would you point out flaws in it?
Think about it, it doesnt make sense...
If you know that girl doesnt exist, any description of her should be null and void......
You cant use descriptions of an entity to prove that it doesnt exist......
Any descriptions of something that doesnt exist is not materiel, ie, it doesnt matter as it will have no impact.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Mikniks:
Appeal to motive... This is not a valid argument.
Why can't I point out flaws in what you believe in? I pointed out flaws in the bible and you didn't think that was irrational. I'm pointing out flaws in what you believe!!! Why is this hard to understand?!?
If you know something doesnt exist, why would you point out flaws in it?
Think about it, it doesnt make sense...
If you know that girl doesnt exist, any description of her should be null and void......
You cant use descriptions of an entity to prove that it doesnt exist......
Any descriptions of something that doesnt exist is not materiel, ie, it doesnt matter as it will have no impact.
Your imaginary girlfriend isn't harmful to society!!!
I could easily argue that not having an imaginary girlfriend is even more harmful to society...
Just ask Pot, Stalin and Hitler........
Give it up, Mikniks, your fav atheistic websites have nothing, have holes in it left right and centre.......Your arguments are tired, boring and have no punch.......
Humans much smarter than you have tried to dosprove God for thousads of years, and have FAILED......
Your wasting your time..
0
Quote Originally Posted by Mikniks:
Your imaginary girlfriend isn't harmful to society!!!
I could easily argue that not having an imaginary girlfriend is even more harmful to society...
Just ask Pot, Stalin and Hitler........
Give it up, Mikniks, your fav atheistic websites have nothing, have holes in it left right and centre.......Your arguments are tired, boring and have no punch.......
Humans much smarter than you have tried to dosprove God for thousads of years, and have FAILED......
I could easily argue that not having an imaginary girlfriend is even more harmful to society...
Just ask Pot, Stalin and Hitler........
Give it up, Mikniks, your fav atheistic websites have nothing, have holes in it left right and centre.......Your arguments are tired, boring and have no punch.......
Humans much smarter than you have tried to dosprove God for thousads of years, and have FAILED......
Your wasting your time..
Now you're accusing me of plagiarizing like your friend matt? That's funny.
My arguments have no holes. What you are attempting to do is question my motives, which we have already established is not a valid argument strategy...
0
Quote Originally Posted by Rostos:
I could easily argue that not having an imaginary girlfriend is even more harmful to society...
Just ask Pot, Stalin and Hitler........
Give it up, Mikniks, your fav atheistic websites have nothing, have holes in it left right and centre.......Your arguments are tired, boring and have no punch.......
Humans much smarter than you have tried to dosprove God for thousads of years, and have FAILED......
Your wasting your time..
Now you're accusing me of plagiarizing like your friend matt? That's funny.
My arguments have no holes. What you are attempting to do is question my motives, which we have already established is not a valid argument strategy...
Now you're accusing me of plagiarizing like your friend matt? That's funny.
My arguments have no holes. What you are attempting to do is question my motives, which we have already established is not a valid argument strategy...
Of coure you r getting your arguments from your athistic websites.......
They have holes in them everwhere.......they r tired, have been tried for centuries yet belief in God contunies to grow, funny that
0
Quote Originally Posted by Mikniks:
Now you're accusing me of plagiarizing like your friend matt? That's funny.
My arguments have no holes. What you are attempting to do is question my motives, which we have already established is not a valid argument strategy...
Of coure you r getting your arguments from your athistic websites.......
They have holes in them everwhere.......they r tired, have been tried for centuries yet belief in God contunies to grow, funny that
I get my proof from the same place you get your proof that aliens in fact exist........
Can you distinguish between "proof" and "substantial evidence?" Let me answer that for you: no
Once again, the difference between us and you.
Atheists: only use 100% facts; anything that is not a fact is described as such
Theists: use opinion and belief, but claim it is fact
Rostos (because you are in a class of your own): reads atheist arguments, changes the argument into something easily refutable, then argues against it while completely ignoring what the atheist actually said
Example:
Atheist: it is a near certainty that aliens exist
Rostos: hahahahahaha you criticize us for believing in god without evidence but you say you have proof aliens exist
And that is how Rostos fails to respond effectively, just one example, it will happen again I'm sure.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Rostos:
I get my proof from the same place you get your proof that aliens in fact exist........
Can you distinguish between "proof" and "substantial evidence?" Let me answer that for you: no
Once again, the difference between us and you.
Atheists: only use 100% facts; anything that is not a fact is described as such
Theists: use opinion and belief, but claim it is fact
Rostos (because you are in a class of your own): reads atheist arguments, changes the argument into something easily refutable, then argues against it while completely ignoring what the atheist actually said
Example:
Atheist: it is a near certainty that aliens exist
Rostos: hahahahahaha you criticize us for believing in god without evidence but you say you have proof aliens exist
And that is how Rostos fails to respond effectively, just one example, it will happen again I'm sure.
The Holy Bible is the truth because it is the Word of God!
It is like you are saying that God needed to write another book to verify that His first book which is the Holy Bible is the truth...lol
For how could anyone outside of God verify anything about the Bible to be the truth?
Do you see your problem?
We are always going to use the Holy Bible, senseless in guys like you saying we can't use the Holy Bible.
The bibe is the word of god you say? But how can something be the word of an entity that does not exist? Surely you will agree that if god does not exist, the bible could not possibly be the word of god. Therefore, for the bible to be the word of god, god must exist. How do we know god exists? You will tell me: the bible. If you don't see the circular logic here, then...well...you do see it, you are just in denial because this isn't a matter of opinion, this is fact. You cannot use a document to verify the existence of what the document says. I cannot use Harry Potter books to prove that Harry Potter exists. I would have to go and find other evidence of Harry Potter to establish that he exists. You cannot use the word of god to prove that god exists, you must go and find other evidence of god to establish that exists. You see the parallel of course.
0
Quote Originally Posted by SirJohnDrake:
No...I don't see the flawed logic.
The Holy Bible is the truth because it is the Word of God!
It is like you are saying that God needed to write another book to verify that His first book which is the Holy Bible is the truth...lol
For how could anyone outside of God verify anything about the Bible to be the truth?
Do you see your problem?
We are always going to use the Holy Bible, senseless in guys like you saying we can't use the Holy Bible.
The bibe is the word of god you say? But how can something be the word of an entity that does not exist? Surely you will agree that if god does not exist, the bible could not possibly be the word of god. Therefore, for the bible to be the word of god, god must exist. How do we know god exists? You will tell me: the bible. If you don't see the circular logic here, then...well...you do see it, you are just in denial because this isn't a matter of opinion, this is fact. You cannot use a document to verify the existence of what the document says. I cannot use Harry Potter books to prove that Harry Potter exists. I would have to go and find other evidence of Harry Potter to establish that he exists. You cannot use the word of god to prove that god exists, you must go and find other evidence of god to establish that exists. You see the parallel of course.
Yes...because it is weak, so it's ignored. There is absolutely nothing out there that you can use as an argument to make your point...absolutely nothing!
0
Quote Originally Posted by KittyKatz286:
There you go again ignoring my argument.
Yes...because it is weak, so it's ignored. There is absolutely nothing out there that you can use as an argument to make your point...absolutely nothing!
Yes...because it is weak, so it's ignored. There is absolutely nothing out there that you can use as an argument to make your point...absolutely nothing!
You're missing the point. Your argument is not an argument. What you are using is called circular logic.
0
Quote Originally Posted by SirJohnDrake:
Yes...because it is weak, so it's ignored. There is absolutely nothing out there that you can use as an argument to make your point...absolutely nothing!
You're missing the point. Your argument is not an argument. What you are using is called circular logic.
Yes...because it is weak, so it's ignored. There is absolutely nothing out there that you can use as an argument to make your point...absolutely nothing!
You're missing the point. Your argument is not an argument. What you are using is called circular logic.
0
Quote Originally Posted by SirJohnDrake:
Yes...because it is weak, so it's ignored. There is absolutely nothing out there that you can use as an argument to make your point...absolutely nothing!
You're missing the point. Your argument is not an argument. What you are using is called circular logic.
Yes...because it is weak, so it's ignored. There is absolutely nothing out there that you can use as an argument to make your point...absolutely nothing!
Yes there is. You completely ignored my 100% VALID argument regarding the analogy of Harry Potter and the bible. This has nothing to do with whether god actually exists. It has to do with you using circular logic.
YOU CANNOT USE THE BIBLE TO VALIDATE WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS.
God exists.
Prove it.
The bible says so.
Why is the bible true?
It is the word of god.
How can the bible be the word of god if god doesn't exist.
God exists.
Prove it.
The bible says so.
Why is the bible true?
It is the word of god.
How can the bible be the word of god if god doesn't exist.
God exists.
Prove it.
The bible says so.
Why is the bible true?
It is the word of god.
How can the bible be the word of god if god doesn't exist.
God exists.
Prove it.
The bible says so.
Why is the bible true?
It is the word of god.
How can the bible be the word of god if god doesn't exist.
ANALOGY ALERT. Look it up SJD since obviously you don't understand the word.
Harry Potter exists.
Prove it.
The Harry Potter books say so.
Why are the Harry Potter books true?
They are the word of Harry Potter.
How can the Harry Potter books be the word of Harry Potter if Harry Potter doesn't exist.
Harry Potter exists...
DO YOU SEE THE PARALLEL? I can't say Harry Potter exists just because the books talk about him. By the same logic, you can't say god exists just because a book talks about him because the book (bible)'s validity is contingent on god existing in the first place.
0
Quote Originally Posted by SirJohnDrake:
Yes...because it is weak, so it's ignored. There is absolutely nothing out there that you can use as an argument to make your point...absolutely nothing!
Yes there is. You completely ignored my 100% VALID argument regarding the analogy of Harry Potter and the bible. This has nothing to do with whether god actually exists. It has to do with you using circular logic.
YOU CANNOT USE THE BIBLE TO VALIDATE WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS.
God exists.
Prove it.
The bible says so.
Why is the bible true?
It is the word of god.
How can the bible be the word of god if god doesn't exist.
God exists.
Prove it.
The bible says so.
Why is the bible true?
It is the word of god.
How can the bible be the word of god if god doesn't exist.
God exists.
Prove it.
The bible says so.
Why is the bible true?
It is the word of god.
How can the bible be the word of god if god doesn't exist.
God exists.
Prove it.
The bible says so.
Why is the bible true?
It is the word of god.
How can the bible be the word of god if god doesn't exist.
ANALOGY ALERT. Look it up SJD since obviously you don't understand the word.
Harry Potter exists.
Prove it.
The Harry Potter books say so.
Why are the Harry Potter books true?
They are the word of Harry Potter.
How can the Harry Potter books be the word of Harry Potter if Harry Potter doesn't exist.
Harry Potter exists...
DO YOU SEE THE PARALLEL? I can't say Harry Potter exists just because the books talk about him. By the same logic, you can't say god exists just because a book talks about him because the book (bible)'s validity is contingent on god existing in the first place.
Hot Forum Topics
