This thread is for proof that God exists

by juandefiero 375 Replies latest jw friends

  • cappytan
    cappytan

    Cofty: I gotta admit, I laughed at Fishermans "debait" joke.

    😂😂😂

  • prologos
    prologos
    Fisherman: Did you take debait when I underlined High School? you are not debating, you are baiting still. sometimes that brings out good points though.
  • prologos
    prologos
    Fisherman: Did you take debait when I underlined High School? we need an abating of the off topic offerings.
  • Coded Logic
    Coded Logic

    Dear God,

    Please show up and do something. Everyone is arguing all the time about who you are, what you want, and what you're going to do. Please provide some clarity. It would be nice too if you could get people to stop killing each other in your name and trespassing upon the rights of others. And it would be especially great if you could chime in on this thread and shut up all of us stupid non-believers.

    Sincerely,

    An Agnostic Atheist

    .

    .

    PS: There was no milk in the house this morning and I didn't find this out until after I poured my bowl of cereal - please make sure this sort of travesty don't happen in the future ;)

    xoxo

  • cofty
    cofty
    Therefore, your presents mean something to me. - Fishy

    That's nice to know but what are my "presents"?

    I never knew until now that you were a JW

    I was a born-in and served as a pioneer and elder. Are you still an active JW?

  • Twitch
    Twitch

    So you posted a quote from the UDHR that you agree has absolutely nothing to do with the conversation.

    I agreed to nothing, Mr. Chairman. I think the articles have some relevance to the topic. While it doesn't address or qualify a religious belief, it nonetheless supports the right to any belief and explicitly, the freedom to express opinions without interference. It says nothing of proof or criticism or what interference really means but clearly the charter encompasses critical thought under freedom of opinion and expression. So in essence, the charter does support your assertions though the question may be where the line is between one's freedom and anothers especially with regard to the topic.

    But if you felt the post was irrelevant, you could've just said so in the beginning, yes?


    You did

    Then you proceeded to "address the person".

    I didn't address the initial post to anybody in particular and posted no opinion on it. Rather than speaking to what the articles say and support, you questioned me on what I think they say and support or rather, what they don't. This does not mean you failed to address the issue, only that you did so by making it personal instead of objective. Such a distinction should be apparent

    Like I said, you could've addressed the ideas directly. "While I agree with the articles, I think criticism is/is not...etc" That you chose to make it personal instead is a matter of record. It could've been a different and better conversation IMO

    But while we're on the personal note, I suspect this post of the charter ruffles your feathers a bit, yes? I mean, why would you rather question me and my alleged misunderstanding of the charter's intent? Do you have a problem with me posting such ideas or the ideas themselves?

  • Landy
    Landy

    @ Twitch

    Are you on drugs?

  • Twitch
    Twitch

    @ Twitch

    Are you on drugs?

    Here we go...lol

    No, actually. Relevance?

  • Landy
    Landy

    Well, you put up a comment, appropos of nothing, regarding the declaration of human rights and then get all snotty when someone asks you why.

  • Landy
    Landy
    ....but Bobby Fisher did teach me how to play chess

    If he had the good grace to teach you how to play chess you could at least do him the courtesy of spelling his name correctly!

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit