Here is another thing, why would a supreme intelligent designer created bodies that required food in the first place? What purpose would this be for? If there were a purpose that we do not understand then why would he create it so that we do not use all that we eat? Why would we need to pee or defecate? Wouldn’t a perfect designer make it so that we would use up all the material that we would eat instead of most of it coming out of us as waste and which we would have to deposit on his Earth?
Originally posted by xX-Angel-Xx
Half of those were just examples of how people treat God and not my personal beliefs.Yes, i would sooner accept the testimony of a prophet than a scientist, only because God would know things that we don't. It's basically an explanation by a greater scientist (without assuming anything is a lie or a conspiracy).
2 + 2 = 4? It could be 22, you could be adding the shapes together instead. Your assumption would be that it's adding the physical numbers together, rather than the shapes 2 and 2.
Physical truths however can only be changed by their creator, just like your meaning of 2 + 2 could be changed by yourself.
🙄
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
1. Why would I want to prove you wrong? I like having you ignorant. 😉2. Jesus.
3. Would that be a conspiracy of conspiracies? 😂
4. You have not shown that the universe requires a creation.
What you believe is circular logic. Look it up.
1. Fair dos, but if my logic was any worse than yours I would not believe in my logic.
2. So you're saying you now believe he did all those miracles? My definition was more regarding power wise.
3. So someone would conspire for there to be a conspiracy which is infact not a conspiracy? 😕
4. The universe does not require a creation. But it does require logic.
5. I could make anything circular logic if I wanted to.
Originally posted by xX-Angel-XxWhat makes him a prophet, because he says so? How would you know that he/she is not lying to you?
Half of those were just examples of how people treat God and not my personal beliefs.Yes, i would sooner accept the testimony of a prophet than a scientist, only because God would know things that we don't. It's basically an explanation by a greater scientist (without assuming anything is a lie or a conspiracy).
2 + 2 = 4? It could be 22, you could be adding the shapes together instead. Your assumption would be that it's adding the physical numbers together, rather than the shapes 2 and 2.
Physical truths however can only be changed by their creator, just like your meaning of 2 + 2 could be changed by yourself.
Failed attempt at the equation, since the numbers are declared you could not concatenate them, also since the declared value is 4 you could not create it to be 22. The only result is 4.
Originally posted by xX-Angel-Xx
1. Fair dos, but if my logic was any worse than yours I would not believe in my logic.2. So you're saying you now believe he did all those miracles? My definition was more regarding power wise.
3. So someone would conspire for there to be a conspiracy which is infact not a conspiracy? 😕
4. The universe does not require a creation. But it does require logic.
5. I could make anything circular logic if I wanted to.
i know your feeling uber smart saying all this post modernist hocus pocus, beleiving that people are too stupid to understand things at your level, but trust me, its getting old and you look very silly right now. no offence.
Originally posted by Da Pittman
What makes him a prophet, because he says so? How would you know that he/she is not lying to you?Failed attempt at the equation, since the numbers are declared you could not concatenate them, also since the declared value is 4 you could not create it to be 22. The only result is 4.
The thing that makes someone a prophet is alot of things. But they are just as likely to lie to me as the government and scientists. And I don't really believe that to be true.
I could think of many reasons, that I'm really not going to waste my time putting down, why I don't believe Moses was lying and they're similiar reasons as to why you don't think the government/scientists would lie.
The circular logic is on your part, not in the realm of physics, so I did not really change anything.
*Warning: sometimes I edit my posts when I say the wrong word/misrepresent the point that I was trying to make*
Originally posted by xX-Angel-Xx
1. Fair dos, but if my logic was any worse than yours I would not believe in my logic.
I have never told you my logic. We have only talked about yours.
Originally posted by xX-Angel-Xx
2. So you're saying you now believe he did all those miracles? My definition was more regarding power wise.
What? You asked me for someone who claimed to be god. Did I misunderstand you?
Originally posted by xX-Angel-Xx
3. So someone would conspire for there to be a conspiracy which is infact not a conspiracy? 😕
I’m not into conspiracies, so I wouldn’t know.
Originally posted by xX-Angel-Xx
4. The universe does not require a creation. But it does require logic.
You keep jumping sides on the argument.
Originally posted by xX-Angel-Xx
5. I could make anything circular logic if I wanted to.
Circular logic is NOT a good thing.
Originally posted by xX-Angel-XxHow is it I'm using circular arguments? Please try again and prove that you can make that equation circular?
The thing that makes someone a prophet is alot of things. But they are just as likely to lie to me as the government and scientists. And I don't really believe that to be true.
I could think of many reasons, that I'm really not going to waste my time putting down, why I don't believe Moses was lying and they're similiar reasons as to why you don't think the government/scientists would lie.The circular logic is on your part, not in the realm of physics, so I did not really change anything.
*Warning: sometimes I edit my posts when I say the wrong word/misrepresent the point that I was trying to make*
I never said that a government/scientists would not lie, there is a huge difference here. First of all a government is not normally run or controlled by one person, as an example with the US. By saying that the government is lying that would be saying that millions of people are in on it. Now a small branch of the government might lie to cover something up in their branch but what you said makes absolutely no scene at all even if it is not your personal opinion.
So by using your logic and that since no one witnessed the creation of the universe how can you be sure that Mosses even was real? What evidence do you have to support this? What evidence do you have that he spoke to God?
Originally posted by xX-Angel-Xx
It seems I'm making too many wording boo-boos here, so I'm going to clarify.Example:
Apples are real because i have the evidence.
I have the evidence because I can see the apples.
I can see the apples because they're real.That's true, right?
Well, it's also circular logic.
No, it is not circular logic.
Circular Reasoning – supporting a premise with the premise rather than a conclusion.
Originally posted by xX-Angel-XxNope but funny 😄
It seems I'm making too many wording boo-boos here, so I'm going to clarify.Example:
Apples are real because i have the evidence.
I have the evidence because I can see the apples.
I can see the apples because they're real.That's true, right?
Well, it's also circular logic.
Originally posted by xX-Angel-XxThis might help http://ksuweb.kennesaw.edu/~shagin/logfal-pbc-circular.htm
It seems I'm making too many wording boo-boos here, so I'm going to clarify.Example:
Apples are real because i have the evidence.
I have the evidence because I can see the apples.
I can see the apples because they're real.That's true, right?
Well, it's also circular logic.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison😛
Teach the man how to fich. 😉
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
No, it is not circular logic.Circular Reasoning – supporting a premise with the premise rather than a conclusion.
Apples are real because i have the evidence.
I have the evidence because I can see the apples.
I can see the apples because they're real.
Premise underlined. Just replace apples with God.
Originally posted by xX-Angel-Xx
Apples are real because i have the evidence.
I have the evidence because I can see the apples.
I can see the apples because they're real.Premise underlined. Just replace apples with God.
But I can talk an apply and test it to find if in fact a conclusion can be made about it.
Just because you can wrongfully state something that is true, does not mean that something wrongfully stated is always true.
Originally posted by xX-Angel-XxThat statement doesn't even make any scene
Apples are real because i have the evidence.
I have the evidence because I can see the apples.
I can see the apples because they're real.Premise underlined. Just replace apples with God.
1. All mammals are carnivores.
2. Lions are mammals.
3. Lions are carnivores.
True but a flawed logic
Originally posted by xX-Angel-Xx
Apples are real because i have the evidence.
I have the evidence because I can see the apples.
I can see the apples because they're real.Premise underlined. Just replace apples with God.
God are real because i have the evidence.
I have the evidence because I can see the God.
I can see the God because they're real.
🙄
I have no reason to believe what you do.
The source of the laws of physics is clearly capable of producing intelligence, end of.
Due to this I have little reason to doubt the claims of any religious book, other than findings by other unperfect humans which could still be explained by scriptures anyway, and assumptions about conspiracies and lies.