Originally posted by Clean CutYour god had a great folly? What was it?
is that we (theists) go according to facts and we base our belief on these facts. We try to understand what God has put in place the best we can, and do not harp on silly little things we have no understanding of. We accept that His greatest folly is far superior to our highest intellect and that now we know in part, then we shall know fully.
The athei ...[text shortened]...
All of this based on a thumb suck.
Waaaahhahahahahahahahaahaahhaa!!!!!! What a hoot!!!!!!!
You speak the truth. Stop questioning; abandon reason; and praise Muffy, Ruler of the Super-spiritual, Greatest One over the gods. Jehovah, Zeus, and Ra all quake before Muffy.
Originally posted by Clean Cut
Don't you know the exact age of our planet? Yet you claim this as fact…..Hmmmm??…….smacks of a thumb suck to me.
What about "It all exploded from one single point 18 billion years ago, or so”
What do you mean by “or so”? There is no “or so” in fact……….plenty of “or so” in thumb sucking though.
"You are about 50 years of age or so, give or take 45 years."
Isn't that a fact?
Originally posted by telerionNope! he might be only 3 and still sucking his thumb!
"You are about 50 years of age or so, give or take 45 years."
Isn't that a fact?
[edit] keep in mind that he spent months trying to open a door and later got stuck in a room for 7 years trying to get his 'rebellion' under control.
He clearly counts time different from the rest of us so he might actually be 250.
1 Day for God = 1,000 years for man = 1,000,000 years for Clean Cut
Originally posted by telerionGreat come back. I'm impressed. Did you think of that all your self?
Your god had a great folly? What was it?
You speak the truth. Stop questioning; abandon reason; and praise Muffy, Ruler of the Super-spiritual, Greatest One over the gods. Jehovah, Zeus, and Ra all quake before Muffy.
Originally posted by nige22
Basically you are saying "we (theists) have absolutely no way of proving definitively the existence of God. Oh no! How can we sell this pitch without any proof. I know, lets say that the nature of God and His creation are inherantly beyond our feeble mortal understanding. If we cannot possibly understand it why bother trying? Therefore we are free of any resp tists shouldn´t have to provide any evidence to support their claims any more than theists do.
Originally posted by Clean CutI´m interested to know:
One night I was in a car, as a passenger, on route to a seminar when I suddenly saw a highway with a white clad guy standing on the other side beckoning me. I approached Him and He introduced himself to me as Jesus. He then said I should follow Him, he had something to show me. He took me to a room, opened the door and invited me inside. The contents were ...[text shortened]... asting and spiritual warfare in all it’s diversity. Totally awesome. I feed like a starved man.
a) did the driver of the car see Jesus too?
b) if not, how did they react to you asking to be let out of the car to speak to Jesus, or did you just open the door and leap out?
Originally posted by Clean CutPhysical evidence. I know it's a hard concept, especially for the hard of thinking, like yourself.
There you go again………” What about this fact. The earth is a minimum of 4.5 billion years old.”………..
Who told you that? What do you mean it's a "minimum" of 4.5 billion years old? Don't you know the exact age of our planet? Yet you claim this as fact…..Hmmmm??…….smacks of a thumb suck to me.
What about "It all exploded from one single point 18 billion y ...[text shortened]... e looked upon favourably.
“Not by might nor by power but by My Spirit,” says the Lord.
Originally posted by scottishinnzPhysical evidence does not imply fact. There is much evidence that the earth is 4.5 billion years old. It probably is. However, this does not make it a fact, only the most likely possibility.
Physical evidence. I know it's a hard concept, especially for the hard of thinking, like yourself.
Originally posted by whiteroseI guess it all comes down to your definition of what a fact is. For me, something like radiodating provides a "factual" age of an object or item. The laws of physics demand certain things, like the rates of radioisotope decay.
Physical evidence does not imply fact. There is much evidence that the earth is 4.5 billion years old. It probably is. However, this does not make it a fact, only the most likely possibility.
Originally posted by scottishinnzAh, but now we get into science as the be-all and end-all of the universe. If science says it, then it must be a fact. How did we get the current laws of physics, chemistry, and biology? By observation of the world around us. They are very useful laws, but probably not perfect. Therefore, to say that something is a "fact" because the laws of physics, which are not absolute but only drawn from impirical evidence, decree it is a bit of a stretch. To me it is like saying that because a coin has landed on heads 100 times in a row, it is a "fact" that it is double headed. In all likelyhood it is, but there is always the remote possibility that it is not.
I guess it all comes down to your definition of what a fact is. For me, something like radiodating provides a "factual" age of an object or item. The laws of physics demand certain things, like the rates of radioisotope decay.