The main issue with Christianity

frank can't acknowledge that we live in a world where some people have way more power than others.

thus he can't really discuss anything.
 
Frank Apisa said:
Okay...you are out of control.

You go on IGNORE immediately.

Have fun ranting.
Click to expand...

bye, beta.
800-pound-gorilla-in-software-resized-600.png
 
Frank Apisa said:
The unbolded part is kinda bullshit.
Click to expand...
Please explain why. I can't read your mind. Are you saying that a normal, rational adult would somehow not agree with you and would not find what you wrote to be intuitive and reasonable?

Frank Apisa said:
Always?
Click to expand...
Yes, always. That was his theorem. It is what he proved.

Frank Apisa said:
You are asserting that he proved there is ALWAYS such a statement.
Click to expand...
It's not my assertion. It's a proven theorem, just as is the Pythagorean theorem.

Frank Apisa said:
He most assuredly did not.
Click to expand...
He did, and you are now denying math.

Frank Apisa said:
This is a hypothetical so far stretched, that a person would have to be a fool to engage it seriously. I am not a fool.
Click to expand...
You have just tipped your king. Let me know when you'd like to reengage.

Frank Apisa said:
In summary, I would invoke laughter to deal with your insistence that we should accept that “no gods exists” because…well, just because you (or Gödel) want us to.
Click to expand...
This is the standard leftist defeat strategy. Upon losing, never admit it, deny the loss through historical revisionism by mischaracterizing what was said and done. I never made any of these assertions. You were simply unable to address the Incompleteness theorem.

Frank Apisa said:
It will be fun…and since it will show my argument to be MUCH stronger than yours, ...
Click to expand...
The strength of your argument never entered the scenario. All that was being discussed was the ability to argue the position of knowability for the theistic assertion in question. It was you who revealed that your argument wasn't strong enough to stand up to the Incompleteness Theorem. You might want to work on it.

Frank Apisa said:
I would never suggest any of your arguments are stupid, although I would argue some are wrong. This one is.
Click to expand...
You are attacking an argument that was never made because its mere mention makes you feel threatened in some way.

Frank Apisa said:
If you can “find it in your heart” to appreciate that and not ask me or speculate about my “beliefs”…I would appreciate it.
Click to expand...
If you express theism in Global Warming or Climate Change, then discussing your beliefs is appropriate. If you simply wish to discuss something that you believe but do not know, then the word "belief" is the appropriate word. You are obviously bothered by the use of the word "belief" in certain situations where it is entirely appropriate. Why?
 
Last edited:
Frank Apisa said:
Okay...you are out of control. You go on IGNORE immediately. Have fun ranting.
Click to expand...
Just a suggestion, instead of putting him on ignore (which would not facilitate any sort of discussion), perhaps you could just recognize that JesusAI lives in a mostly chaotic world that has him feeling helpless, and that the only way he can feel as though he has any sort of control is to redefine words. If you realize that he specifically means something other than what he wrote, you can at least begin to pull the discussion back on track. Of course, JesusAI will go kicking and screaming the entire way, but at least you'll move forward.
 
Quincunx said:
Rebuttal implies you made a valid point worthy of riposte. Sorry you are so confused.
Click to expand...

yes. i did.

Assertion: The environmental movement is a spinoff off the eugenics movement, designed to get people to kill other people out of misguided environmental fears.

Your turn, captain fuckcheese.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top