Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
You have descended to the same level as the evolution-deniers that say humans are not apes, and chickens are not theropods.
You obviously have not been paying attention. There are two choices. The choice is everyone's to make, just how they see it. Then...everyone gets what they choose.Or do you mean; when will he agree with you?
Could be, when you can provide some justification that is logical for your claims. If you can't, no problem, you can still hold onto those for your own personal satisfaction.
You obviously have not been paying attention. There are two choices. The choice is everyone's to make, just how they see it. Then...everyone gets what they choose.
I was merely pointing out that proving or justifying my choice, is no different then justifying or proving any other choice. The rules are the same. I get to say what evidence is acceptable, and so does everyone else...and that is all the Atheist crowd has offered (their rules and facts and history, etc. are all that count). I counter that argument with the same rules: mine are all that count, and yours do not. Have it your way bergerking![]()
Let me put it this way: In the end, on my path there is (hypothetically) a chance to continue living after physical death. On your path, you die and it's over. But, I am not selling anything. Have it your way.Don't tell us, you know how to decipher it correctly?
All you did was assert that some bible stories were accurate descriptions of reality.I just leveled the playing field.
The next move is yours. Put up this demonstration, or abdicate.What...no moves left?
Let me put it this way: In the end, on my path there is (hypothetically) a chance to continue living after physical death. On you path, you die and it's over. But, I am not selling anything. Have it your way.
No. I "asserted" that by your rules you can not demonstrate what you consider true (your reality) without drawing from your own playbook...which (by your rules) is not allowed. In fact, I demand that you demonstrate your reality using only things from my playbook (which I only do, because those are your rules).All you did was assert that some bible stories were accurate descriptions of reality.
The next move is yours. Put up this demonstration, or abdicate.
No. I "asserted" that by your rules you can not demonstrate what you consider true (your reality) without drawing from your own playbook...which (by your rules) is not allowed. In fact, I demand that you demonstrate your reality using only things from my playbook (which I only do, because those are your rules).
Two can play at this. You can dish it out. Lets see if you can take it: Prove ANYTHING in your reality, using only my playbook. I will be waiting.
Not even reading my posts.Not even <snip yet another irrelevant straw-man>
EVERYTHING is either true or false, by one version of history and reality or another by [intelligent] design. Only one version is true. All of the choices are riddled. One must choose. The correct choice could possibly mean life after physical death, the rest are likely certain death. Choose wisely.Reality, history and the meaning of life are all either; true or false?
Need to fill in a few gaps there, don't you?
Abdication accepted. Michael never gets anywhere with that fallacy either, but he pulls it out often enough.
I am not making truth claims.I "asserted" that by your rules you can not demonstrate what you consider true
Define what you mean by "reality". In the common vernacular, there is only one. Axioms, and all that.(your reality)
What is this "playbook" that you allude to?without drawing from your own playbook
My rules? What are, exactly, my rules?...which (by your rules)
Word salad.is not allowed. In fact, I demand that you demonstrate your reality using only things from my playbook (which I only do, because those are your rules).
Why, thanks.Two can play at this. You can dish it out.
Take it? I can't even make sense of it. My reality? Your playbook? What are you talking about?Lets see if you can take it: Prove ANYTHING in your reality, using only my playbook. I will be waiting.
I can relate. The Panenthiest side of me has everything to do with the experiential aspect and has very little to do with logic. It's when I add the evolutionary combined with the Lambda-CDM (I had to google it) model that I go with logic.He's been appealing to authority throughout this thread, but apparently it's easier for him to feign neutrality since he has no logical explanation for preferring one over the other.![]()