(December 29, 2018 at 8:28 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote:(December 29, 2018 at 4:52 pm)T0 Th3 M4X Wrote: 1. Incorrect. Validation of one thing does not automatically validate or invalidate the existence of something else. If you subjectively attribute a name or title to someone, it doesn't mean another subject can't maintain that same name or title. Additionally, saying something isn't coherently defined isn't even of the ballpark of being correct. We have dictionaries, encyclopedias that define things, including "God" or "gods." So if you find those definitions incoherent, then it's a personal malfunction of your ability to comprehend something. Heck, I can comprehend who "Zeus" is supposed to be, even though I don't assert any special meaning to him that dictates my own life.
2. It is defined. See 1. Do we need to start referencing said literature for definitions? Maybe then we can have a definition YOU can understand.
In all that, you did get one thing right. "You don't get to tell other people what they are thinking." He can't read your mind and you can't read his. The rest of that statement is subjective based on authority. It's not automatically assumed, but it can be presumed. If the person asks you to, then based on that, you can attempt to tell them what they are thinking, even though your answer may be incorrect.
This from the moron who thinks the word atheist isn't well defined. You're talking out of both sides of your mouth, Max, but then, that's to be expected.
OMG ... this guy needs meds ...
No dear, I never said that ... it's the word "god" that is not defined.
Get back to your prayers, Bozo, (but thanks for making a fool of yourself).
Every religion is true one way or another. It is true when understood metaphorically. But when it gets stuck in its own metaphors, interpreting them as facts, then you are in trouble. - Joseph Campbell
Militant Atheist Commie Evolutionist
Militant Atheist Commie Evolutionist