questfortruth
Well-Known Member
Prove it. Otherwise it is non-fictional, so the monster could exist. If even FSM could exist, then the God of the Bible also can.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Mitochondrial Eve is proven to be wife of Adam
- Thread starter questfortruth
- Start date
-
- Tags
- adam and eve
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
What? It appears that you did not understand that post.
questfortruth
Well-Known Member
Do not talk to me like a hell damn rude disrespectful troll. You are not troll!!! You are creation of Almighty One!
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
I have given you far more respect than you have give to anyone. Also you earn disrespect. Don' complain when people respond appropriately. You misunderstood my post at best. Why did you not correct your error?
questfortruth
Well-Known Member
WHAT ERROR? My belief system?
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
It appears that you cannot follow a conversation. You asked if the Flying Spaghetti Monster was "announced" as being fictitious. I responded "No." meaning that it was not "announced" that way.,
questfortruth
Well-Known Member
Then it would be non-fictional, so the monster could exist. If even FSM could exist, then the God of the Bible also can.
ecco
Veteran Member
As could the God Of Last Thursdayism. Do you believe everything was created Last Thursday? It's just as likely a scenario as that posited in your version of the Bible.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
You don't appear to understand the word "non-fictional". That would mean that it is real.
Here is a clue, just because something is not "announced" as being fictional does not mean that it is non-fictional.
Last i heard they lived about 100,000 years apart,thats some age gap even by todays standards.
Wrong, there is no proof of gods existence. None. You provide proof and not only will you end atheism you would have the world top religious leaders fighting on your doorstep just to have a few minutes chat with you.
Have you ever considered why it is called "faith"
Kangaroo Feathers
Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
It's wrong because you don't provide logical or empirical support for the claim.
Kangaroo Feathers
Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
I announce New Zealand is fictional all the time. Does that mean it is actually fictional?
No, that doesn't logically follow. How a thing is represented is not an accurate indicator of its reality. Seers and prophets announce new revelations all the time, but their sincerity is no indication of the veracity of their claims. Only tangible, objective evidence can support their claims.
And Einstein announced his cosmological constant "the biggest blunder of my life".
You can make any claim you want, but only testing and empirical evidence will determine what's really true.
Of course the Bible God might exist, but, till we have actual evidence, the only logical stand is to withhold belief.
questfortruth
Well-Known Member
No, the Multi World interpretation of Quantum Mechanics is not fictional, but it is not real.
The fictional thing is a thing, which is announced by author to be non-existent. For example, if book is called "Fairytale", then the persons in the book are fictional.
If a monster is not announced as fiction, then it is not fictional.
But FSM is fictional, because:
1. It is absurd: spaghety can not fly, and pasta is dead.
Do you agree then, that FSM does not exist? Have I finally disproven the pastafarians?
questfortruth
Well-Known Member
Einstein has called the non-zero value of constant as mistake, not the fiction. The fiction is what does not exist. The constant is what the formulas contain. Do you argue with math?
Milton Platt
Well-Known Member
This a positively laughable bit of writing. If you ever come accross anything approaching science, please try again.
Your generalization about atheism is also off the mark.
ecco
Veteran Member
Psychic Snowflakes.
As far as I know, I am the person who first raised the question of the existence of Psychic Snowflakes. I was in an online discussion with a person whose position was that if something was not proven impossible, then its existence must be considered an actual possibility. I tried to make a comparison between God and Santa Claus. He objected vehemently to my using childishness. I then raised the subject of Psychic Snowflakes. He had to admit that, since Psychic Snowflakes had never been proved impossible, they could exist.
So, questfortruth, do you accept the possibility of the actual existence of Psychic Snowflakes? If not why not? Please stick to the arguments you have been making and the logic used for these arguments. No goal shifting.
ecco
Veteran Member
On what do you base that belief?