Search results

:FACEPALM: When writers insert or alter words in a direct quotation, square brackets—[ ]—are placed around the change.

.... you really dont understand do you? Dragon Glas asked where i had said that in the past, that is the quote i keep repeating where i said it..... This: God = apple; Atheist believe in apples, contradiction? No.... the definition of God atheist don't believe in ISN'T THE SAME as an apple...

God = apple; Atheist believe in apples, contradiction? No.... the definition of God atheist don't believe in ISN'T THE SAME as an apple. replace apple with universe, problem solved. An all powerful, eternal universe IS NOT a god by atheist definition, just like apples are not God by atheist...

:FACEPALM: exactly, there is no contradiction between atheism and pantheism because it's 'stupid' to call the universe god

Feel free to give examples. There have been three debated definitions: 1. Atheism is a lack of belief. 'py.. something' said, then christians are atheists... I said yes (i gave dawkins quote). he said that's a contradiction, i said no its not, christians are partial atheists bcuz they don't...

Hey that's exactly what i said...... 'back'/Leroy is actually making valid points and engaging with the argument its just the defintion trolls who are the problem.

the only people who dont understand the definitions im using are the people on this forum. therefore the people in this forum are the problem Also all my definitions are correct.

I dont... the only people who dont understand the definitions im using are the people on this forum.

If you cannot understand colloquialisms, then the problem is with you. I already admitted, i'm not going to take the time to be particular because arguing definitions is not relevant to my argument........ my intention is talking about the argument.

This has been addressed multiple times, words have multiple meaning EQUIVOCATION FALLACY on your part, no contradiction on mine. The batter is swinging, and the child is swinging; but they are not doing the same thing. Contradiction? No... the batter is swinging a bat, the child is swinging in...

No, i don't understand the logic you are using to come to this conclusion..... For an atheist a God is an all powerful being of some kind (doesn't matter what the actual definition is, just go with it for the sake of the argument) If i am an appleist, i define this apple i am holding as God...

How are you so bad at understanding words? When i said God = apple, i meant that i am defining the word God to mean a literal physical apple. Atheist believe in physical apples; Contradiction? No... because the God atheist don't believe in has a different definition than a physical apple...

As i have said before, you an idiot.... Gj repeating exactly what i said with a different word and saying its not the same thing. Google 'accept definition' 2. believe or come to recognize (an opinion, explanation, etc.) as valid or correct. "this tentative explanation came to be accepted by...

This address all pointless definition arguments raised in all past 23 pages: This has been addressed multiple times, words have multiple meaning EQUIVOCATION FALLACY on your part, no contradiction on mine. The batter is swinging, and the child is swinging; but they are not doing the same...

Im just copying the logic he is using to solve the problem....... so i would ask What exactly is "God nature"? and copy that answer. Or i could go with super law of nature like gravity or something, but this is all ad hoc, im not actually arguing for pantheism. Im just demonstrating the same...

Yes this is semantics, but the reason i am asking is because it seems based on the answers to my subsequent question that you define objective as the absolute irrefutable truth. (Absolute irrefutable truth as in can't be false but we just don't know it, i do not mean absolute as in true at...

That is true, but this isn't a serious definition i never refer to christians as atheists in my argument that's just an idiots strawman that they can't themselves understand... but there is no logical contradiction. This has been addressed multiple times, words have multiple meaning...

Again it can't just be human opinion, it has to be any opinion. Otherwise alien opinions are objective. If i were to say "At this moment you are 31 years old", would that be an absolute truth? Can something that is false but we just dont know it yet, be objective? If we existed in a computer...

Im not even going to read your post, its been adequately explained above. If you are to stupid to understand that's your problem, Pull your head out of your ass = problem solved

I'm not even going to read your post your too intellectually beneath me. Its been adequately explain to you why your wrong. you being to stupid to understand that is your problem