What's wrong with this definition of God: maker of heaven and earth and everything?

yrreg said:
See? That is the big difference between you as an atheist and me as a free genuinely thinking mind: you keep running and trying to hide from me, but I am not in any way afraid to confront you and talk reason and facts with you.


See, everyone here, see the fact of this poor man always running but not being able to hide at all.

Yrreg
Click to expand...

Yrreg, you've demonstrated repeatedly your inability to use either reason or facts, then run away once you realise you've failed again.

As Mojo says, you're just projecting your own failings onto others.
 
Justinian2 said:
Take heart, not everybody is a troll even though it seems that way at times.

Troll doo-doo is everywhere.
Click to expand...

I might have known that you would side with Yrreg. Do you agree with his statement that god exists because we have a nose? How's the auditing going? Bank account filling up? I see that you have ceased to troll the $cientology thread.
 
dafydd said:
I might have known that you would side with Yrreg. Do you agree with his statement that god exists because we have a nose? How's the auditing going? Bank account filling up? I see that you have ceased to troll the $cientology thread.
Click to expand...

I doubt that's an accurate quote.
 
Justinian2 said:
I doubt that's an accurate quote.
Click to expand...

It is. As just mentioned, first it was a penis then it mutated into a nose. Also god exists because the universe exists. Yrreg said so. No proof needed, as long as you accept his idiosyncratic definitions of words.
 
Mashuna said:
Well, originally the claim was that God exists because we have a penis, but he later modified it to a nose.
Click to expand...

Is there anyone who wants to dig up the relevant posts for Justinian? I can't be bothered. Perhaps Yrreg would like to explain it to Justinian.
 
You piece words together without thinking and without any actual experience.

wollery said:
Funny, I never did get a response to this post -
Originally Posted by wollery
Originally Posted by yrreg

What is north of the North Pole?

You forget to think, the answer is more north onward further north.
​
I'm standing 200 metres away from the North Pole. How do I go further North? Easy, I walk 200 metres towards the North Pole.

Now I'm standing at the North Pole, please explain, which direction should I walk in to go further North?

​
Click to expand...



You piece words together without thinking and without any actual experience.

Okay,
Edited by Tricky: 
Edited for civility.
, just try this experience, imagine that you are flying an airplane and you are above the North Pole, and you want to get farther north, what do you do?

You are lost and asking yourself what is north of the North Pole?

Go and do that exercise in your brain,
Edited by Tricky: 
Edited for civility.


But with regrets from my part, the phrase "more north onward farther north," should be read (but only because you do not have reading comprehension) thus: more north upward [onward] farther north."


Edited by Tricky: 
Edited for civility.

Anyway, tell me, if you are an airplane pilot with your craft hovering say 200 meters above the North Pole, meaning above that point of planet earth which is the North Pole point, and you want to get still higher above the North Pole, i.e. directly farther north-bound in space above the point on the earth's surface called the North Pole, what do you do?

I have never flown an airplane but I have flown kites, and if I want my kite to still climb higher above where I am actually standing on earth, I give it extra string; but of course it cannot be exactly directly vertically above my head upward as to be perpendicularly above in the sky situated in reference to the earth's surface I am standing on.

Okay, what about a space shuttle, can it not be launched upward from the point location of the North Pole, and be navigated so as to climb higher and higher and higher directly upward northbound into farther space directly above the earth's North Pole?



I am ready and eager to learn from people more intelligent and learned and experienced than myself;
Edited by Tricky: 
Edited for civility.




Yrreg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
yrreg said:
wollery said:
Funny, I never did get a response to this post -
Originally Posted by wollery
Originally Posted by yrreg

What is north of the North Pole?

You forget to think, the answer is more north onward further north.
​
I'm standing 200 metres away from the North Pole. How do I go further North? Easy, I walk 200 metres towards the North Pole.

Now I'm standing at the North Pole, please explain, which direction should I walk in to go further North?

​
Click to expand...



You piece words together without thinking and without any actual experience.

Okay,
Edited by Tricky: 
Edited for civility.
, just try this experience, imagine that you are flying an airplane and you are above the North Pole, and you want to get farther north, what do you do?

You are lost and asking yourself what is north of the North Pole?

Go and do that exercise in your brain,
Edited by Tricky: 
Edited for civility.


But with regrets from my part, the phrase "more north onward farther north," should be read (but only because you do not have reading comprehension) thus: more north upward [onward] farther north."


Edited by Tricky: 
Edited for civility.

Anyway, tell me, if you are an airplane pilot with your craft hovering say 200 meters above the North Pole, meaning above that point of planet earth which is the North Pole point, and you want to get still higher above the North Pole, i.e. directly farther north-bound in space above the point on the earth's surface called the North Pole, what do you do?

I have never flown an airplane but I have flown kites, and if I want my kite to still climb higher above where I am actually standing on earth, I give it extra string; but of course it cannot be exactly directly vertically above my head upward as to be perpendicularly above in the sky situated in reference to the earth's surface I am standing on.

Okay, what about a space shuttle, can it not be launched upward from the point location of the North Pole, and be navigated so as to climb higher and higher and higher directly upward northbound into farther space directly above the earth's North Pole?



I am ready and eager to learn from people more intelligent and learned and experienced than myself;
Edited by Tricky: 
Edited for civility.




Yrreg
Click to expand...

You have already had one warning. As for your nonsense about the plane, it would be going into space, where there is no north. Imagine a spaceship a million light years from the Earth. Imagine a straight line drawn from the spaceship to the north pole, which just happens to be in the right position. If the spaceship increased the distance from the Earth would it be going north?

''Engage engines Mr. Sulu.''
''Course, Captain?''
''North''



Are you sure that you want to be on his side, Justinian?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Justinian2 said:
dafydd said:
I might have known that you would side with Yrreg. Do you agree with his statement that god exists because we have a nose? How's the auditing going? Bank account filling up? I see that you have ceased to troll the $cientology thread.
Click to expand...
I doubt that's an accurate quote.
Click to expand...
Mashuna said:
Well, originally the claim was that God exists because we have a penis, but he later modified it to a nose.
Click to expand...
dafydd said:
Is there anyone who wants to dig up the relevant posts for Justinian?
Click to expand...


Here you go:
yrreg said:
For those who are always repeatedly abusing me that I have not presented my argument for the thesis that the universe is the evidence for God's existence, here it is:

1. First we agree on the concepts of God and the universe as:

God = in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the universe, maker of everything in the universe that is not Himself.

Universe = the totality of existence where man lives in and is part and parcel of, as also everything else that exists or at least can be the subject of man's imagination and discourse.
​

2. Then we present
the fact of the nose existing in the universe so it is a part and parcel of the universe.​

3. Next we inform readers of
the fact that the nose has a beginning and an ending.​

4. Further we bring to the attention of readers that
the fact of the nose having a beginning and an ending is a one for all fact that everything in the universe has a beginning and an ending.​

5. Wherefore
everything in the universe has need of an agent to bring them to the beginning of their existence.​

6. And this fact that everything in the universe has a need of an agent to bring them to existence and the fact that they do exist,
that double fact is the evidence that:​

7. There is an agent which I call
God, who is the maker of everything in the universe that is not Himself.​


Thus, from the realm of concepts we arrive at the realm of real actualities in
the existence of God as the maker of everything in the universe that is not Himself.​
​



That is what I call proof from evidence by way of ratiocination i.e. reasoning on facts which facts make up evidence.



The crux of the argument is to work with posters here who are serious on the common thought acceptable to everyone on what is the concept of evidence.


Aside from working together to come to common concepts on God and on the universe.

No need to come to common concept on the nose, unless you are overly doubtful you have a nose in your face because you have taken a vow of doubting everything -- in which case please leave at your earliest convenience from this thread.
Click to expand...


And who could forget yrreg's "God exists, argument from penis and vagina" thread?
 
Justinian2 said:
I doubt that's an accurate quote.
Click to expand...
On the contrary, that's the essence of his argument, as you can see from the quotes.

Yrreg, upwards into space is not north. Compass directions don't work like that.
 
I am ready and eager to learn from people more intelligent and learned and experienced than myself; but from my exposure with atheists, they are not any more intelligent or more learned or more intelligent than myself, only more gullible and unthinking and more arrogant and scornful.
Click to expand...

Gullible? That's rich. You are the one who has been fooled into believing in an imaginary being.
 
Agatha said:
On the contrary, that's the essence of his argument, as you can see from the quotes.

Yrreg, upwards into space is not north. Compass directions don't work like that.
Click to expand...

Captain Kirk was always saying things like ''Warp factor nine, south-by-southwest.'' Yrreg, you really are a tonic. What else don't you know?
 
yrreg said:
Okay, what about a space shuttle, can it not be launched upward from the point location of the North Pole, and be navigated so as to climb higher and higher and higher directly upward northbound into farther space directly above the earth's North Pole?

Yrreg
Click to expand...

Up is not the same as North.
 
It's almost good enough for a Stundie. Yrreg, honestly, did you study things like geography and mathematics at school? I'm not trying to be flippant or insulting, I'm really quite shocked that a presumably educated adult doesn't understand compass or cardinal directions.

I'll explain for you, and if I'm not explaining clearly then please jump in and say where I've not been clear. There are six directions; north, south, east, west, up and down. North and up are not the same thing, and south and down are not the same thing. When you are walking about or using a map or a globe, you just need to think about the four compass directions. However, if you go upwards or downwards, for example if you go away from the surface in either direction, you then need to consider the other two directions which are up and down.

To use your example, if you go straight upwards from the North Pole you aren't going any further north (because there is no "further north" to go), you are going up.

This explanation on wiki might help: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardinal_direction#Beyond_geography

In the real world there are six cardinal directions not involved with geography which are north, south, east, west, up and down. In this context, up and down relate to elevation, altitude, or possibly depth (if water is involved).
Click to expand...

Does that make it clearer for you?
 
Last edited:
It might be for the best, given that he called wollery (an astrophysicist) a dummy.

Still, I hope he reads my post about directions and understands it, I hate to think of an adult not having that basic knowledge.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom