I am a theist, what do you think of my proof for God existing?

[I_am_not_mafia]

Facking 'ell mate is he still at it trying to magic his god into existence with logic?

[robvalue]

Still waiting for why I should care. 92 pages of this? Surely you have some idea why it might be important.

[pocaracas]

Dear Simon Moon, we have to postpone your desire to resume our exchange, because I have just challenged Stimbo to a one and on exchange – see ANNEX, text in bold.

You are being dishonest!

You spent half this thread trying to engage with Simon, and now that he does, you just dismiss the time he spent addressing your drivel, just because you "challenged stimbo"...

You are one "special" person, aren't you?

[Simon Moon]

Dear Simon Moon, we have to postpone your desire to resume our exchange, because I have just challenged Stimbo to a one and on exchange – see ANNEX, text in bold.

You are being dishonest!

You spent half this thread trying to engage with Simon, and now that he does, you just dismiss the time he spent addressing your drivel, just because you "challenged stimbo"...

You are one "special" person, aren't you?

He just figured out yet another way of avoiding my repeated refutation of his 'proof'.

I didn't expect anything different from Mariosep, possibly the most intellectually dishonest theist we've had here.

[Cyberman]

To be honest, I never even noticed this "challenge". I usually just skim past this guy's drivel to get to something interesting. And correctly formatted without someone having to kick him up the arse about it.

[downbeatplumb]

Please atheists here, and no need to use the words magic, magical, in your messages against God existing, just as with your foul language, that is not going to save you from the fact that you are always running away from the issue itself, on God exists or not.

On current evidence I can confidently state that no god of any description is a thing.

Now, dear readers here, let us await with bated breath for more abusive utterances from our atheists here, in place of reasoned and calm discussion of causation, evidence, and how babies are the evidence of ultimately the existence of an entity corresponding to the concept of God,

No they aren't.

namely, first and foremost God is the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.

Nothing that corresponds to the common idea of a god is in the frame for what started the universe  and there are quite a few contenders look it up, its a valid sphere of research.

To atheists here, let you just talk sense instead of raving mad with foul language, on babies are the evidence of causation from papa and mama, and thus by inference from our reason and intelligence, the evidence of God, in concept as first and foremost the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.

You're wrong

Edward John is no longer around; if I may, he could not take anymore of atheists' foul language and personal attacks against their debate opponents.

Ever wonder why atheists use foul language? its because we aren't afraid of words.

Take notice, dear readers, when you read atheists’ posts coming after this post from yours truly, will they be into reasoned and calm exchange or throwing in more foul language and personal attacks against their opponents, which are all indication of their tactics to escape from the issue itself of God exists or not.

God does not exist.

Sad that they do this with impunity, because their self-identity as atheists entitles them to engage in foul language and attacks on the person of their opponents; that atheist identity is the tolerance that mankind is supposed to absorb to bear with them because they are atheists, but mankind in the US will exercise also their right to take them for the most despicable minority in the US.

And yet where I come from religion is dying. The church where I was baptised as a child is now a pub because people don't go to church. Religious people are something of an oddity over here.

Okay, atheists here, what will it be, reasoned and calm discussion on causation, evidence, and babies from papa and mama, and the issue God exists or not, or you will continue with your entitlement as atheists to seek refuge in foul language and attacks on the person of your opponents, and end there?

You seem obsessed with swearing, why is that was there some trauma in your past?

Get ready, dear readers, atheists here will not take up causation, evidence, and of course all in connection with babies coming to existence and life from papa and mama of the world, as to get linked to the issue God exists or not; but you will have to bear again with their raving mad foul language and attacks on the person of their opponents.

Wow your a repetitious little thing aren't you!

[Cyberman]

Edward John is no longer around; if I may, he could not take anymore of atheists' foul language and personal attacks against their debate opponents.

You are entitled to your opinion; however just as with so many of them, it is wrong. Edward John was banned for very specific reasons spelled out in the Staff Log. I prophesy the truth won't alter your opinion though. But hey, whatever gets you off at night I suppose.

As far as "foul language" goes, words are not as offensive as the intentions behind them. It's been said that there's no such thing as bad language, only bad people - and they can be bad in any language. There's little I've seen around here more intended to cause offence than the sentiment that people who don't share a person's beliefs or opinions deserve to be burned and tortured, simply for the crime of having a different point of view.

[Minimalist]

He is just trolling you guys for 88 pages already. Stop responding.

Oh we know... but then we get to use stuff like this.



The fucktard can't believe his silly god doesn't just strike us dead.  Maybe that will plant the seed of doubt in his shit-filled little mind?

[Simon Moon]

Dear Simon Moon, we have to postpone your desire to resume our exchange, because I have just challenged Stimbo to a one and on exchange – see ANNEX, text in bold.

We never had an 'exchange'.

I pointed out obvious flaws in your 'proof' and flaws in your analogy of babies being created by biological reproduction, compared to the creation of the universe, and you never responded to any of them.

Here's how an exchange should work with discussions like this one:

You: post your 'proof' for the existence of a god.

Us: point our flaws in your argument,

You: respond DIRECTLY to our points concerning the flaws we think we have found. Giving your best reason why we are wrong.

Etc....

Instead what did we get? You immediately ignored any and all responses by us pointing out the flaws in your 'proof', then, in a complete non sequitur, you headed off on some path of wanting us to prove that noses exist.

And 90 pages later, you are still finding ways of ignoring us when we point out the flaws with your 'proof'.

And you wonder why you are receiving abuse and 'foul' language...

[Minimalist]

The only proof this dickhead can manage is poured from a liquor bottle.