Nope, not sham science. I am indeed not conducting sham science by posting on an Internet discussion board. LOL You should retire.
Originally posted by: Vic
Really? So claiming that evolution in and of itself answers the age-old human question of "Why?" is not sham science? Kindly shut up.
Originally posted by: Vic
You're not a true scientist either. Just some internet dipsh!t who thinks science answers questions that it does not. Evolution is just evolution. Not an end-all-be-all and -- in all reality -- no more important to peoples' daily lives than is the nonsense that is creationism. When you turn it into the pseudoscience religion, as you are trying to do, it just becomes another form of control, as creationism was for the religions. Please don't turn my science into your religion. I find it offensive. Thanks.
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
Originally posted by: Vic
LOL! The English definitions are the same as what I described.
Nope. Hence your need to go into your personal definition based on a preference for "por que" etc. You backpedalled-- you asked "why", which clearly means "for what reason, cause or purpose", then realized that it wasn't just what you wanted for presupposing the existence of an almighty supernatural creator.
You'd have to have made this request in some other context to have a chance. Unfortunately, you're beating yourself senseless against a solid cliff of evidence and logic. ID is sham science.Speaking of why... why don't you just admit you don't know what you're talking about?
Nope. It's also not true to say "Evolution is just a big long string of 'begat' after 'begat'". It's also not true to say "Evolution is made of blue cotton candy", "Evolution is the heart of rock and roll", or any other senseless combination of words.The action of evolutionary principles is just spreading one's seed.
Are you arguing that that's our sole purpose in life? The only thing we're here for? That's the WHY we all seek? Spread our seed as best we can, prevent others from doing the same (this is evolution after all) and who gives a damn about the rest? Is that your argument?
Evolution explains why we are here. Pure and simple. You aren't restricted to a sole purpose-- you can have many, and the world is full of happy pursuits. There's no way you can logically get to a presupposition of an almighty creator based just on a particular use of the word "purpose", though-- you are putting the cart before the horse.
You are deeply confused and off your rocker. None of the positions you are presenting here for me are positions that I have argued for or supported. While you are looking up definitions in the dictionary, I suggest you look strawmen as well. I do not support ID, creationism, or any other such nonsense and have never said so.
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
No, I'm not off my rocker. I used no straw men. Point to a single, specific one instead of just using the word in a conclusive way-- you can't. As it is plain for anyone but you to apparently see, you attempted with a few twistings of words to say that evolution cannot answer this question: for what purpose were we created? Don't be stupider than necessary.
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
how's your religion working out for you? You are angry because your stupidity has been exposed. I have certainly not claimed that evolution answers what it does not.
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
No, I'm not off my rocker. I used no straw men. Point to a single, specific one instead of just using the word in a conclusive way-- you can't. As it is plain for anyone but you to apparently see, you attempted with a few twistings of words to say that evolution cannot answer this question: for what purpose were we created? Don't be stupider than necessary.
Wow... make it easy for me:
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
how's your religion working out for you? You are angry because your stupidity has been exposed. I have certainly not claimed that evolution answers what it does not.
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
No, I'm not off my rocker. I used no straw men. Point to a single, specific one instead of just using the word in a conclusive way-- you can't. As it is plain for anyone but you to apparently see, you attempted with a few twistings of words to say that evolution cannot answer this question: for what purpose were we created? Don't be stupider than necessary.
Wow... make it easy for me:
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
how's your religion working out for you? You are angry because your stupidity has been exposed. I have certainly not claimed that evolution answers what it does not.
Dumbass.
"God has never changed, only man's perception of Him, which is ever evolving."
"all modern evolution science has done is proven that God created the world through evolution, just like the Bible said He did"
Need I go on? No, you're not religious. ROFLMAO just can't cut it sometimes.
The fact that you have singularly confused views on religion obviously doesn't mean you are not religious. I've met wack jobs before-- even on the Internet, believe it or not.
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
No, I'm not off my rocker. I used no straw men. Point to a single, specific one instead of just using the word in a conclusive way-- you can't. As it is plain for anyone but you to apparently see, you attempted with a few twistings of words to say that evolution cannot answer this question: for what purpose were we created? Don't be stupider than necessary.
Wow... make it easy for me:
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
how's your religion working out for you? You are angry because your stupidity has been exposed. I have certainly not claimed that evolution answers what it does not.
Dumbass.
"God has never changed, only man's perception of Him, which is ever evolving."
"all modern evolution science has done is proven that God created the world through evolution, just like the Bible said He did"
Need I go on? No, you're not religious. ROFLMAO just can't cut it sometimes.
The fact that you have singularly confused views on religion obviously doesn't mean you are not religious. I've met wack jobs before-- even on the Internet, believe it or not.
Wow... you can take quotes way out of context so as to completely change my originally intended meanings. That's amazing and fantastic (and surely not in any way representative of straw men, oh no!). And the search function really does work if you try hard enough despite what all those other fools say! All of which doesn't change the fact that you yourself are the worst type of whacked-out religious if you think that evolution answers -- all by itself -- the question of WHY (which defined by you means "for what purpose") humans exist. Evolution tells us how we got here. No more. No less. Your little game here doesn't change that.
2) I show that he is, indeed religious (and a nutjob to boot)
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
No, I'm not off my rocker. I used no straw men. Point to a single, specific one instead of just using the word in a conclusive way-- you can't. As it is plain for anyone but you to apparently see, you attempted with a few twistings of words to say that evolution cannot answer this question: for what purpose were we created? Don't be stupider than necessary.
Wow... make it easy for me:
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
how's your religion working out for you? You are angry because your stupidity has been exposed. I have certainly not claimed that evolution answers what it does not.
Dumbass.
"God has never changed, only man's perception of Him, which is ever evolving."
"all modern evolution science has done is proven that God created the world through evolution, just like the Bible said He did"
Need I go on? No, you're not religious. ROFLMAO just can't cut it sometimes.
The fact that you have singularly confused views on religion obviously doesn't mean you are not religious. I've met wack jobs before-- even on the Internet, believe it or not.
Wow... you can take quotes way out of context so as to completely change my originally intended meanings. That's amazing and fantastic (and surely not in any way representative of straw men, oh no!). And the search function really does work if you try hard enough despite what all those other fools say! All of which doesn't change the fact that you yourself are the worst type of whacked-out religious if you think that evolution answers -- all by itself -- the question of WHY (which defined by you means "for what purpose") humans exist. Evolution tells us how we got here. No more. No less. Your little game here doesn't change that.
So... to recap:
1) Vic claims he is not religious
2) I show that he is, indeed religious (and a nutjob to boot)
3) Vic says that I take his Bible quotations and statements about his belief in God so amazingly, fantastically out of context that, um, I obscure the fact that he is not religious.
Don't get me started, dumbass. I can pull up scads of posts where you quote the Bible directly, as you talk about God with a Capital G, and His Mighty Works.
You've made yourself look very silly. And the fact remains that evolution does indeed point out why we are here. Too bad we had to take a side-trip through your pathetic attempts to avoid placing the blame for your argumentation squarely where it rests: your religion. You attempt to deny the worth of evolution because, at heart, you believe we were created by a divine being.
Originally posted by: Excelsior
2) I show that he is, indeed religious (and a nutjob to boot)
No you didn't. If anyone with half a brain reads the posts that you took those statements from they wouldn't think Vic was religious. Hell, on one of the pages you took a quote from he even says "If in fact God exists...". A religious man (who believed in a single god) wouldn't doubt that god's existence.
And in the second quote, if anything, he is playing a Devil's advocate.
There is only one God, regardless of what names you choose to give Him (by "Him", I do wish that the English had a respectful pronoun that implied the embodiment of both genders, unlike "it" which is a disrespectful neuter prounoun).
Slightly off topic, I believe that the true nature of God is that He is apart of us and we are apart of Him. That a part of God exists (or is capable of existing) in each one of us. Most Christians would refer to this as the presence of the Holy Spirit. In other words, one could say that God represents that capacity inside us to be righteous and do good. When a person calls upon God, He is not necessarily praying to some "fictitious Sky King" as the atheists claim, but to that part of him- or herself that is most capable of righteous strength and goodness.
This is NOT a "New Age" religious concept. Let me call your attention to Matthew 22:36-40, otherwise known as the "Greatest Commandment".
36 ?Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law??
37 Jesus replied: ? ?Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.?
38 This is the first and greatest commandment.
39 And the second is like it: ?Love your neighbor as yourself.?
40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.?
Originally posted by: Excelsior
2) I show that he is, indeed religious (and a nutjob to boot)
No you didn't. If anyone with half a brain reads the posts that you took those statements from they wouldn't think Vic was religious. Hell, on one of the pages you took a quote from he even says "If in fact God exists...". A religious man (who believed in a single god) wouldn't doubt that god's existence.
And in the second quote, if anything, he is playing a Devil's advocate.
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
No, I'm not off my rocker. I used no straw men. Point to a single, specific one instead of just using the word in a conclusive way-- you can't. As it is plain for anyone but you to apparently see, you attempted with a few twistings of words to say that evolution cannot answer this question: for what purpose were we created? Don't be stupider than necessary.
Wow... make it easy for me:
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
how's your religion working out for you? You are angry because your stupidity has been exposed. I have certainly not claimed that evolution answers what it does not.
Dumbass.
"God has never changed, only man's perception of Him, which is ever evolving."
"all modern evolution science has done is proven that God created the world through evolution, just like the Bible said He did"
Need I go on? No, you're not religious. ROFLMAO just can't cut it sometimes.
The fact that you have singularly confused views on religion obviously doesn't mean you are not religious. I've met wack jobs before-- even on the Internet, believe it or not.
Wow... you can take quotes way out of context so as to completely change my originally intended meanings. That's amazing and fantastic (and surely not in any way representative of straw men, oh no!). And the search function really does work if you try hard enough despite what all those other fools say! All of which doesn't change the fact that you yourself are the worst type of whacked-out religious if you think that evolution answers -- all by itself -- the question of WHY (which defined by you means "for what purpose") humans exist. Evolution tells us how we got here. No more. No less. Your little game here doesn't change that.
So... to recap:
1) Vic claims he is not religious
2) I show that he is, indeed religious (and a nutjob to boot)
3) Vic says that I take his Bible quotations and statements about his belief in God so amazingly, fantastically out of context that, um, I obscure the fact that he is not religious.
Don't get me started, dumbass. I can pull up scads of posts where you quote the Bible directly, as you talk about God with a Capital G, and His Mighty Works.
You've made yourself look very silly. And the fact remains that evolution does indeed point out why we are here. Too bad we had to take a side-trip through your pathetic attempts to avoid placing the blame for your argumentation squarely where it rests: your religion. You attempt to deny the worth of evolution because, at heart, you believe we were created by a divine being.
You know, it's strange your tactics here. I wonder why you think that such obvious lies strengthen your argument?
First, the threads you pulled up, while interesting flashbacks to 2 years ago, don't say about me what you claim they do. For example, in the first thread, I was arguing against the religious more than I was against the anti-religious.
Second, that I claim I am not religious does not mean that I am not uneducated about religion. Perhaps it's this crucial point here where we differ. You see, I think that hatred and ignorance combined make bigotry. Therefore, I make it a point to never be against anything until I have educated myself completely about it.
Third, it is proper English to capitalize the word God when speaking about the singular Almighty in particular, as opposed to a "lesser" god, i.e. the rain god or whatever. Get a clue.
Fourth, evolution does no such thing, and I have taken particular note of the fact that you have made no attempt to prove your claim beyond simply stating and that you have obviously gone to serious effort (given the infamous nature of the search engine here, I think some would say stalker-like effort) to make a personal attack against me in order to distract from your lack of argument in that regard.
Fifth, I have NEVER denied evolution, simply questioned those who take things on faith that they do not themselves understand.
Lastly, I do not believe that I was created by a divine being. Nor do I disbelieve either. Simply put, there is insufficient evidence for or against which, if you actually had a brain and the ability for freethinking (which you obviously do not on either count) you would understand. Instead, you seem more than happy to accept what you do not yourself know or understand simply because you have been told by those in authority to do so, just like any other religious person.
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
Originally posted by: Excelsior
2) I show that he is, indeed religious (and a nutjob to boot)
No you didn't. If anyone with half a brain reads the posts that you took those statements from they wouldn't think Vic was religious. Hell, on one of the pages you took a quote from he even says "If in fact God exists...". A religious man (who believed in a single god) wouldn't doubt that god's existence.
And in the second quote, if anything, he is playing a Devil's advocate.
Nope, you're absolutely wrong. If anything, when he says "If in fact God exists" he is playing devil's advocate, or playing his same stupid game of momentarily attempting to hide his religion.
Here's another:
There is only one God, regardless of what names you choose to give Him (by "Him", I do wish that the English had a respectful pronoun that implied the embodiment of both genders, unlike "it" which is a disrespectful neuter prounoun).
Slightly off topic, I believe that the true nature of God is that He is apart of us and we are apart of Him. That a part of God exists (or is capable of existing) in each one of us. Most Christians would refer to this as the presence of the Holy Spirit. In other words, one could say that God represents that capacity inside us to be righteous and do good. When a person calls upon God, He is not necessarily praying to some "fictitious Sky King" as the atheists claim, but to that part of him- or herself that is most capable of righteous strength and goodness.
This is NOT a "New Age" religious concept. Let me call your attention to Matthew 22:36-40, otherwise known as the "Greatest Commandment".
36 ?Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law??
37 Jesus replied: ? ?Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.?
38 This is the first and greatest commandment.
39 And the second is like it: ?Love your neighbor as yourself.?
40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.?
Yeah, Vic's not religious at all. :laugh: It doesn't matter that he is a crackpot, spouting off the type of mystical bullshit that seems invented to get in the pants of impressionable young girls at parties. He openly avows his religious beliefs.
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
Originally posted by: Excelsior
2) I show that he is, indeed religious (and a nutjob to boot)
No you didn't. If anyone with half a brain reads the posts that you took those statements from they wouldn't think Vic was religious. Hell, on one of the pages you took a quote from he even says "If in fact God exists...". A religious man (who believed in a single god) wouldn't doubt that god's existence.
And in the second quote, if anything, he is playing a Devil's advocate.
Nope, you're absolutely wrong. If anything, when he says "If in fact God exists" he is playing devil's advocate, or playing his same stupid game of momentarily attempting to hide his religion.
Here's another:
There is only one God, regardless of what names you choose to give Him (by "Him", I do wish that the English had a respectful pronoun that implied the embodiment of both genders, unlike "it" which is a disrespectful neuter prounoun).
Slightly off topic, I believe that the true nature of God is that He is apart of us and we are apart of Him. That a part of God exists (or is capable of existing) in each one of us. Most Christians would refer to this as the presence of the Holy Spirit. In other words, one could say that God represents that capacity inside us to be righteous and do good. When a person calls upon God, He is not necessarily praying to some "fictitious Sky King" as the atheists claim, but to that part of him- or herself that is most capable of righteous strength and goodness.
This is NOT a "New Age" religious concept. Let me call your attention to Matthew 22:36-40, otherwise known as the "Greatest Commandment".
36 ?Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law??
37 Jesus replied: ? ?Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.?
38 This is the first and greatest commandment.
39 And the second is like it: ?Love your neighbor as yourself.?
40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.?
Yeah, Vic's not religious at all. :laugh: It doesn't matter that he is a crackpot, spouting off the type of mystical bullshit that seems invented to get in the pants of impressionable young girls at parties. He openly avows his religious beliefs.
Clearly you have never heard of Spinoza.
I've painted myself into a corner and am in the wrong because you've made a misguided personal attack against me because you refuse to elaborate on your argument of how evolution (not science you said, but evolution specifically) answers the age-old human question of WHY? I suppose I can understand why you'd want to keep it under wraps. I mean... wow as soon as you publish you're certain to win the Nobel Prize!Originally posted by: 6000SUX
You painted yourself into a corner here. You are obviously in the wrong and should give up.
Originally posted by: Vic
I've painted myself into a corner and am in the wrong because you've made a misguided personal attack against me because you refuse to elaborate on your argument of how evolution (not science you said, but evolution specifically) answers the age-old human question of WHY? I suppose I can understand why you'd want to keep it under wraps. I mean... wow as soon as you publish you're certain to win the Nobel Prize!Originally posted by: 6000SUX
You painted yourself into a corner here. You are obviously in the wrong and should give up.
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
Originally posted by: Excelsior
2) I show that he is, indeed religious (and a nutjob to boot)
No you didn't. If anyone with half a brain reads the posts that you took those statements from they wouldn't think Vic was religious. Hell, on one of the pages you took a quote from he even says "If in fact God exists...". A religious man (who believed in a single god) wouldn't doubt that god's existence.
And in the second quote, if anything, he is playing a Devil's advocate.
Nope, you're absolutely wrong. If anything, when he says "If in fact God exists" he is playing devil's advocate, or playing his same stupid game of momentarily attempting to hide his religion.
Here's another:
There is only one God, regardless of what names you choose to give Him (by "Him", I do wish that the English had a respectful pronoun that implied the embodiment of both genders, unlike "it" which is a disrespectful neuter prounoun).
Slightly off topic, I believe that the true nature of God is that He is apart of us and we are apart of Him. That a part of God exists (or is capable of existing) in each one of us. Most Christians would refer to this as the presence of the Holy Spirit. In other words, one could say that God represents that capacity inside us to be righteous and do good. When a person calls upon God, He is not necessarily praying to some "fictitious Sky King" as the atheists claim, but to that part of him- or herself that is most capable of righteous strength and goodness.
This is NOT a "New Age" religious concept. Let me call your attention to Matthew 22:36-40, otherwise known as the "Greatest Commandment".
36 ?Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law??
37 Jesus replied: ? ?Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.?
38 This is the first and greatest commandment.
39 And the second is like it: ?Love your neighbor as yourself.?
40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.?
Yeah, Vic's not religious at all. :laugh: It doesn't matter that he is a crackpot, spouting off the type of mystical bullshit that seems invented to get in the pants of impressionable young girls at parties. He openly avows his religious beliefs.
Originally posted by: BigJ
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
Originally posted by: Excelsior
2) I show that he is, indeed religious (and a nutjob to boot)
No you didn't. If anyone with half a brain reads the posts that you took those statements from they wouldn't think Vic was religious. Hell, on one of the pages you took a quote from he even says "If in fact God exists...". A religious man (who believed in a single god) wouldn't doubt that god's existence.
And in the second quote, if anything, he is playing a Devil's advocate.
Nope, you're absolutely wrong. If anything, when he says "If in fact God exists" he is playing devil's advocate, or playing his same stupid game of momentarily attempting to hide his religion.
Here's another:
There is only one God, regardless of what names you choose to give Him (by "Him", I do wish that the English had a respectful pronoun that implied the embodiment of both genders, unlike "it" which is a disrespectful neuter prounoun).
Slightly off topic, I believe that the true nature of God is that He is apart of us and we are apart of Him. That a part of God exists (or is capable of existing) in each one of us. Most Christians would refer to this as the presence of the Holy Spirit. In other words, one could say that God represents that capacity inside us to be righteous and do good. When a person calls upon God, He is not necessarily praying to some "fictitious Sky King" as the atheists claim, but to that part of him- or herself that is most capable of righteous strength and goodness.
This is NOT a "New Age" religious concept. Let me call your attention to Matthew 22:36-40, otherwise known as the "Greatest Commandment".
36 ?Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law??
37 Jesus replied: ? ?Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.?
38 This is the first and greatest commandment.
39 And the second is like it: ?Love your neighbor as yourself.?
40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.?
Yeah, Vic's not religious at all. :laugh: It doesn't matter that he is a crackpot, spouting off the type of mystical bullshit that seems invented to get in the pants of impressionable young girls at parties. He openly avows his religious beliefs.
See bolded. That statement indicates to me that Vic doesn't believe in God in the traditional sense, but as a part of one's self.
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
Originally posted by: Excelsior
2) I show that he is, indeed religious (and a nutjob to boot)
No you didn't. If anyone with half a brain reads the posts that you took those statements from they wouldn't think Vic was religious. Hell, on one of the pages you took a quote from he even says "If in fact God exists...". A religious man (who believed in a single god) wouldn't doubt that god's existence.
And in the second quote, if anything, he is playing a Devil's advocate.
Nope, you're absolutely wrong. If anything, when he says "If in fact God exists" he is playing devil's advocate, or playing his same stupid game of momentarily attempting to hide his religion.
Here's another:
There is only one God, regardless of what names you choose to give Him (by "Him", I do wish that the English had a respectful pronoun that implied the embodiment of both genders, unlike "it" which is a disrespectful neuter prounoun).
Slightly off topic, I believe that the true nature of God is that He is apart of us and we are apart of Him. That a part of God exists (or is capable of existing) in each one of us. Most Christians would refer to this as the presence of the Holy Spirit. In other words, one could say that God represents that capacity inside us to be righteous and do good. When a person calls upon God, He is not necessarily praying to some "fictitious Sky King" as the atheists claim, but to that part of him- or herself that is most capable of righteous strength and goodness.
This is NOT a "New Age" religious concept. Let me call your attention to Matthew 22:36-40, otherwise known as the "Greatest Commandment".
36 ?Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law??
37 Jesus replied: ? ?Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.?
38 This is the first and greatest commandment.
39 And the second is like it: ?Love your neighbor as yourself.?
40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.?
Yeah, Vic's not religious at all. :laugh: It doesn't matter that he is a crackpot, spouting off the type of mystical bullshit that seems invented to get in the pants of impressionable young girls at parties. He openly avows his religious beliefs.
Clearly you have never heard of Spinoza.
Give up, loser. You've been exposed. You play a cute game of supporting religion, while disavowing any religious bias.
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
Originally posted by: BigJ
See bolded. That statement indicates to me that Vic doesn't believe in God in the traditional sense, but as a part of one's self.
No, it means that he believes that when one prays to God one may be praying to one's self; it does not mean that he is not religious. Gimme a break! Learn to read a little better, and quit defending the scumbag. He doesn't argue honestly.
Originally posted by: Vic
Yep. That's what I thought. You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The concept is sometimes referred to as deism, pantheism, Spinoza's God, Faraday's God, or even sometimes Einstein's God. My citing of the Book of Matthew there was to show that this may have been what Jesus was referring to. Did you not notice how the fundies in the thread attacked me for that?
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
Originally posted by: Vic
I've painted myself into a corner and am in the wrong because you've made a misguided personal attack against me because you refuse to elaborate on your argument of how evolution (not science you said, but evolution specifically) answers the age-old human question of WHY? I suppose I can understand why you'd want to keep it under wraps. I mean... wow as soon as you publish you're certain to win the Nobel Prize!Originally posted by: 6000SUX
You painted yourself into a corner here. You are obviously in the wrong and should give up.
Give up. You've been exposed. Anyone can go back through the painfully bad arguments you made, the way you twisted and turned through "por que" and all the other bullshit. Of course evolution explains why we are here... because of the operation of evolutionary principles. I made no misguided attack; you really are a quasi-mystical religious nutjob. It is not a personal attack to point out that you are religious based on your own statements.
Originally posted by: BigJ
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
Originally posted by: BigJ
See bolded. That statement indicates to me that Vic doesn't believe in God in the traditional sense, but as a part of one's self.
No, it means that he believes that when one prays to God one may be praying to one's self; it does not mean that he is not religious. Gimme a break! Learn to read a little better, and quit defending the scumbag. He doesn't argue honestly.
Nothing from that post of Vic indicates to me that he believes in God in the traditional sense. He was specifically replying to a post by Red Dawn asking what was meant by the term "God."
Honestly, I would suggest you read (especially in context) before telling others they need to try harder. Your hard-on for Vic is typical fundie behavior you see by the religious you hate.
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
Originally posted by: Vic
I've painted myself into a corner and am in the wrong because you've made a misguided personal attack against me because you refuse to elaborate on your argument of how evolution (not science you said, but evolution specifically) answers the age-old human question of WHY? I suppose I can understand why you'd want to keep it under wraps. I mean... wow as soon as you publish you're certain to win the Nobel Prize!Originally posted by: 6000SUX
You painted yourself into a corner here. You are obviously in the wrong and should give up.
Give up. You've been exposed. Anyone can go back through the painfully bad arguments you made, the way you twisted and turned through "por que" and all the other bullshit. Of course evolution explains why we are here... because of the operation of evolutionary principles. I made no misguided attack; you really are a quasi-mystical religious nutjob. It is not a personal attack to point out that you are religious based on your own statements.
Exposed for what? That you're an ignorant pseudoscientist who wrongly thinks that science can answer all of life's questions? And you're so upset that I attacked your precious faith that you had to make a personal attack against me here?
"Because of the operation of evolutionary principles"? What kind of closed-loop logic is that? That's no different than some fundie proving the Bible using the Bible. Should one use those "evolutionary principles" in order to find guidance in his life? :roll:
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
Originally posted by: Vic
Yep. That's what I thought. You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The concept is sometimes referred to as deism, pantheism, Spinoza's God, Faraday's God, or even sometimes Einstein's God. My citing of the Book of Matthew there was to show that this may have been what Jesus was referring to. Did you not notice how the fundies in the thread attacked me for that?
Wrong, nutcake. You are a bona-fide religious person. I am running a poll in a separate thread. If you are honest at all, you'll stay out of it.