Why Protestant and Jewish Families Rule the Earth

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by Philosophiser


Typical Brit.

Crazy biblebashing Yank

[Provost Harrison]

Philosopher and Ben
Sitting in a tree
K.I.S.S.I.N.G.

[Nostromo]

And for the record, I'm agnostic. Not atheist. To say there is no God is just as unprovable as to say there is a God.

But you can disprove claims about God. For example, we know today that God didn't create the universe 10 000 or 100 000 years ago. If you disprove enough of these claims you could end up with a very different understanding of God.

[Sava]

Originally posted by nostromo


But you can disprove claims about God. For example, we know today that God didn't create the universe 10 000 or 100 000 years ago. If you disprove enough of these claims you could end up with a very different understanding of God.

Exactly. Meaning, if there is a God, the real blasphemers are people like Philosophiser.

[Pyrodrew]

The more interesting question is, why does Civ bother?

That's why I asked my questions to him earlier which he refused to answer. I have some guesses, but Phil is an odd beast.

[Philosophiser]

Originally posted by nostromo


But you can disprove claims about God. For example, we know today that God didn't create the universe 10 000 or 100 000 years ago. If you disprove enough of these claims you could end up with a very different understanding of God.

We don't know that today. Stop declaring things that aren't proven. If you want to declare a belief then I invite you to declare a much more reasonable belief- Christianity. The only one I know to be consistent with all data. If you think you can prove your old earth hypotheses I invite you to do so, but until you can you are totally nuts to reject Christianity.

[Elok]

My theory is that it validates his lunatic belief system to be a martyr for the "truth." He knows nobody will listen to him, but by screaming on in defiance of all requests/threats/reason, he can cast himself as part of a big tradition of Christian soldiers who went down fighting. You heard him, he thinks he's just like John the Baptist. The fact that we fight him only proves he's right and that our hearts have been hardened to Obvious Truth. Now I just wonder why I bothered arguing back. Or why any of us did, except those who still found it amusing for whatever reason.

[Philosophiser]

Originally posted by Seeker
The more interesting question is, why does Civ bother?

CivNation has already cast his "pearls" before us "swine".....so why come back for more?

He's already done what his cult demands, God's sovereign power to save whom he will fizzled out as usual (remember god does all the work so civ doesn't have to feel bad about not saving anyone).

So why come back a second time? Since God has already chosen not to save Apolyton Off-Topic, isn't coming back a second time tempting god?

Anyway, I believe CivNation is either:
a) a young boy pretending to be a fundie to piss people off and start big threads
b) mentally ill
c) sincere but evil

Anyone who rejects the existence of prevalence of God is certainly mentally ill.

[Philosophiser]

Originally posted by Elok
My theory is that it validates his lunatic belief system to be a martyr for the "truth." He knows nobody will listen to him, but by screaming on in defiance of all requests/threats/reason, he can cast himself as part of a big tradition of Christian soldiers who went down fighting. You heard him, he thinks he's just like John the Baptist. The fact that we fight him only proves he's right and that our hearts have been hardened to Obvious Truth. Now I just wonder why I bothered arguing back. Or why any of us did, except those who still found it amusing for whatever reason.

You argue back because you know in your heart you are rebelling against the truth, to satiate your own pride.

[Elok]

Hey, you said you were gone for a week...

[Philosophiser]

Originally posted by Elok
Hey, you said you were gone for a week...

I'm not going to let a mentally ill atheist get away with an ad hominem against me.

The reason why I come back from time to time is for all those who don't post. Those silent users who read and consider. Not for the hard hearted ones like you. If you were the only ones I was dealing with then I surely would have wiped the dust off my feet a long time ago and moved on.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Philosophiser
Anyone who rejects the existence of prevalence of God is certainly mentally ill.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Philosophiser


Anyone who rejects the existence of prevalence of God is certainly mentally ill.

What do you call people who argue against demonstrable facts?

Like the science of radiometric dating.

[Philosophiser]

Originally posted by Sava


What do you call people who argue against demonstrable facts?

Like the science of radiometric dating.

You have failed to prove the reliability of radiometric dating. I answered both your varve and your other analysis and you haven't even begun to come back with a clear refutation. I proved two things by my refutation:
1) your scientific analysis was lop sided

2) the dishonesty of scientists who have an agenda and try to squeeze and contort the facts to make it work in their favor (which really is just human nature to an extent)

[Elok]

Originally posted by Philosophiser
You argue back because you know in your heart you are rebelling against the truth, to satiate your own pride.

Oh boy, more Bulverism! My turn:

You argue because you have secret, repressed sexual urges to be dominated (albeit in a logical rather than physical sense). For clear "proof," you even talk dirty ("filthy, filthy idolater!"), and openly get off on ideas of spanking--er, smiting.