Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,914 Year: 4,171/9,624 Month: 1,042/974 Week: 1/368 Day: 1/11 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   GOD IS DEAD
Vacate
Member (Idle past 4631 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 10-01-2006


Message 99 of 304 (483256)
09-21-2008 5:36 AM
Reply to: Message 97 by Agobot
09-21-2008 5:16 AM


Re: What God thinks is not important
Obviously you are wrong. Scientists have not stopped even for a minute pursuing the idea of reaching further deeper into our universe past and finding the nature of the Universe.
I am quite sure you have misread his post.
Otto Tellick writes:
The overall process is meaningless only to those who say it is meaningless. For the rest of us, the meaning extends as far as we are able to extend our awareness.
I am not defending his post, just each time I read it I don't see how you came up with that reply.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by Agobot, posted 09-21-2008 5:16 AM Agobot has not replied

Vacate
Member (Idle past 4631 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 10-01-2006


Message 115 of 304 (483456)
09-22-2008 1:03 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by Agobot
09-22-2008 12:41 PM


The killing blow?
God is not subjective
I am on the edge of my seat! Get Rahvin while he is down, now is your chance to hit him with the evidence.
according to religion he's ...
Nope, that's not gonna do it. Get on with the actual evidence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by Agobot, posted 09-22-2008 12:41 PM Agobot has not replied

Vacate
Member (Idle past 4631 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 10-01-2006


Message 254 of 304 (485628)
10-10-2008 8:01 AM
Reply to: Message 253 by Dawn Bertot
10-10-2008 3:35 AM


A larger list
While you have been arguing "at" my position I would like to point out to the rest of the class that you have failed to provide another explanation in the area of possibiltes for the existence of things besides the only two.
Before I went to raise my hand I wanted to first see what your option was. Do I have your possibility summed up correctly here:
Bertot in message 245 writes:
Go Bible, go Bible, go Bible, go Bible, wag you head back and forth and move your shoulders while singing that diddy
Quite a narrow viewpoint. So I will raise my hand.
A large list of dieties. Add each and every one of them to your "two possibilities for the existance of things". Why so picky?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 253 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-10-2008 3:35 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 255 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-10-2008 8:58 AM Vacate has replied

Vacate
Member (Idle past 4631 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 10-01-2006


Message 257 of 304 (485638)
10-10-2008 9:28 AM
Reply to: Message 255 by Dawn Bertot
10-10-2008 8:58 AM


Re: A larger list
So your main argument is that your are not denying the very real possiblity of a deity
Unfalsifiable, so no.
that a diety is a valid explanation for the existence of things and it should be included as a valid explanation of things in the classroom
What classroom? Science? Then no.
Oh happy day.
Glad I could help.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 255 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-10-2008 8:58 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024