dislike atheism

[syo]

But you must admit you have no evidence to support your assertion.

logic supports it.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

yeah, right...

Yep... that you are arguing from a host of logical fallacies is right. Though I am sure you were being sarcastic, it was at least nice to pretend for a moment that you had come to your senses.

 

[suncowiam]

Every time we debate a theist in these ridiculous arguments, it gives them a platform to stand on.

If they don't care to use simple logic to dispel their own assumptions then there's no point. You might as well argue with a wall. Heck, you might as well hit your head against the wall.

Of course, some where along the line, I'm going to get called arrogant pompous *ss for not acknowledging this or not trying to be more thoughtful or diplomatic in my dialog.

Whatever...

 

[Jesster]

logic supports it.

You keep claiming this, but you never back it up.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

essence is a noun. it's what there is.

Follow me here. Essense works as a pronoun like he/she/it represents bob/jane/chair. Essense replaces the proper noun god (pretending its a name of ??? unidentifable). You'd have to define god before using the pronoun essense to represent it.

 

[syo]

logical fallacies

you are joking right?

 

[Subduction Zone]

yeah, right...

If you don't understand your errors you should ask questions about them. Others saw that I was correct.

 

[syo]

Essense works as a pronoun

no. it is a noun.

 

[syo]

If you don't understand your errors

i don't have errors.

 

[Subduction Zone]

he is Essence. the supreme Essence.

he is Blixiation, the supreme Blixiation.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

you are joking right?

No. You aren't using logic. Granted, you believe you are, but all you're really doing is drawing conclusions you can't possibly know to be true based on nothing more than the fact that they support your chosen narrative.

 

[dfnj]

logic supports it.

I said evidence not logic. But if you want to use just logic then try to wrap your mind around this logical argument.

We have no evidence nothingness ever existed. All we have is evidence that something exists. Therefore, somethingness has always existed.

Before you can create something you first have to have nothing. There is absolutely no evidence to support that "nothing" could actually exist in reality.

 

[Jesster]

i don't have errors.

How dogmatic of you

 

[Subduction Zone]

i don't have errors.

I assume that you are a Christian. It appears that you do not understand the Ninth Commandments. Almost all that you have are errors and they have been continually pointed out in this thread.

 

[syo]

If they don't care to use simple logic to dispel their own assumptions

you are kidding.

 

[Jesster]

Logic supports that this thread is bull****.

There. I won the argument. That's as far as syo wants to take things, so that's all I need to do as well.

 

[syo]

Before you can create something you first have to have nothing.

hahahahahahahahahaha

 

[syo]

Logic supports that this thread is bull****.

There. I won the argument. That's as far as syo wants to take things, so that's all I need to do as well.

hahahahahahahahahaha

 

[syo]

I assume that you are a Christian. It appears that you do not understand the Ninth Commandments. Almost all that you have are errors and they have been continually pointed out in this thread.

LOLOLOLOLOL

 

[syo]

i needed a good laugh!