(May 28, 2018 at 8:31 pm)Ybe Wrote:(May 28, 2018 at 7:52 pm)LostLocke Wrote: So I have seen sufficient evidence to believe in a god?
Which evidence is that?
I think you said you haven't seen sufficient evidence so you have seen evidence.
It is an opinion unless you can prove all evidence you have seen is not sufficient.
And that you are able to reason about evidence logically and properly.
And that you are not denying the evidence for whatever reason.
So back to the Q.
(May 28, 2018 at 8:18 pm)LostLocke Wrote: That god definitely does not exist.
Yet, another reason to ask what logical reason do you have for being an A?
IF you spent 30 years giving reasons for your above statement, if they are illogical,l So what?
(May 28, 2018 at 8:24 pm)mh.brewer Wrote: That's not a "necessary" conclusion, only a conclusion. It's the believers that use it's "necessary" when not necessary to prop up arguments for their god. So ya blew that one. Definition fail.When the premises are true and the conclusion is the only possible conclusion that can be concluded given the premises, then you have my definition of
a "necessary" conclusion...
IS THERE ANYONE OUT THERE THAT CAN HELP THESE GUYS?
I AM LEAVING AND WHEN I COME BACK I HOPE SOMETHING MORE SUBSTANTIAL CAN BE MUSTERED.
So, "make shit up and as long as I believe it, it has to be true and real!!"
I know a few people, professionally, who may be able to help YOU. But you have to want help.
If you bother to return, I hope you can muster something more substantial than repetitive claims with no actual support other than other unfounded claims.
Playing Cluedo with my mum while I was at Uni:
"You did WHAT? With WHO? WHERE???"