Christians - even the Bible says that Jesus was not God so why do you say he was ?

[Heat]

[It's a bit hard to argue against an intentionally confusing argument without providing an equally confusing response. I really had to pause a lot while writing this, and had to push my brain in order to not confuse myself in the process.]

Stop with the word salad's it's giving me a shooting pain in the back of my head.

Just because you manipulate a simple rule just enough so that it confuses you enough to make you unsure of the answer doesn't make it logical.


I've been convinced of this thing called reason. I don't know why, it just seemed like the reasonable thing to do(see what I did there).
You know why? Because no matter what, what is unreasonable to me may be reasonable to you, reason must always exist in the conscious mind, you can't purposefully be unreasonable, even if you did somehow, you are still making a decision that you think it's reasonable to be unreasonable. Therefore if we follow that logic, since reason is always a subjective virtue implanted in our minds, if you can't provide a reason for believing something, there's no explanation for believing it. I don't have to provide a reason for your lack of reason, it's a double negative, I can't disprove a reason that doesn't exist in the first place. Whether or not that "reason" is a credible one, can be answered in a debate of objective and subjective truths, where we can attempt to distinguish objective, from subjective. However, to not provide a reason for believing something, and act like my inability to produce a counter to an argument that never existed in the first place is some sort of justification for that belief, and to follow by acting high and mighty because you managed to not only confuse yourself, but the person in opposition enough so that the question becomes murky and in turn shattering a chance to draw a definite conclusion, that's intellectual suicide.

[Sorry for being repetitive, and answering with a word salad. It's a bit hard to argue against an intentionally confusing argument without providing an equally confusing response. I really had to pause a lot while writing this, and had to push my brain in order to not confuse myself in the process.]

yes it is confusing and i have no idea what your saying maybe you can simplify it so that it makes sense to other people ? you said ' you cant counter an argument that doesnt exist in the first place ' what are you referring to ?

You really like to pick and choose what you read don't you, it explains your attraction to the bible.

I had my friend read over it to make sure it wasn't too confusing to understand. Regardless, i'm convinced that you are willingly trying not to understand it, or do, and are responding with something unrelated in attempt to change the subject/prevent me from further countering your point[Which was clearly in what I quoted you] so that I don't simplify, or admit I don't know how to in this circumstance and you can claim you "don't understand".

I'm honestly just done arguing with you on any part of the forums. You continue, and start, arguments regardless of whether or not you can contribute anything useful to them. You never concede any points, at least not in what i've seen, and my suspicion is that anytime you feel you are proven wrong you stop responding/change the subject, never giving anyone any credit for taking time to analyze your point of view and prove it wrong in a civilized manner. One of my friends said you were really nice, true may it be, I can't stand you, it's the most annoying thing in the world to keep trying to take your POV in to consideration when you constantly try purposefully to not understand what someone says, considering the fact that everyone on this forum has to try their very hardest just to understand what you are saying.


Forget it, I could say more but I don't want to. Concede my point, prove it wrong, or move on. Just don't say it's confusing when you skim through it while half-reading. If you were an intellectual you would at the very least say what parts you are confused on, or write down what you think the person said for clarification or correction. Never have I ever seen any respectable, intelligent person, in a response to someone challenge their views say; "I'm confused, explain it better", and act like that deserves a response, or that the argument was even addressed in any way shape or form.


If you aren't going to respect my time, and my views, don't expect me to respect yours. It's quite insulting I spent 20 minutes writing that, rewriting it and correcting in the process, and as well even went back to correct it some more, and you just say "Too confusing, write it simpler". 

Oh and for the;
"What are you referring to?"
Use your brain, do you think I quoted you for no reason, or are you just admitting that your original point shouldn't be considered or taken seriously as it didn't provide any substance worth referring to?

I'll take either one to be honest, they both define the laughable simplicity and self centered-bias your posts behold.