You can't know your premise....
Of course I can know my premise. What the heck are you talking about?
If God created the universe, if he created the mind, if he orchestrates the future, if he has soverignty, and if he is omnicapable then he does supernatural acts (Magic if that's the best word you have for it).
You can't know any of those premises.
So your conclusion is simply your own personal conjecture. Why should I accept you as a prophet of God but reject my own humble self as a premise-knowing and conclusion-making prophet?
If he does not then he is not God and we need not be concerned with him. Mine can and did and so you have concluded the matter before the contest was even began and you want the heat huh. You can't handle this softball. Why should I bear down?
A major league baseball star visited a junior high school. For fun and for some publicity photos, he agreed to take the field with the girls' baseball team. The school coach allowed a third-string pitcher to lob some balls to the baseball star, but the dear girl couldn't even reach the plate with her best efforts. She couldn't get the ball anywhere near the strike zone. The baseball player felt so sorry for her and behaved with extra politeness toward her, so he was amazed when the little girl began to taunt him.
"You'd better be glad that I don't bear down, Mister Bigshot! You can't even handle these lobs. Imagine if I gave you the real heat!"
On the drive back home, the player mused on that little girl, amazed at how anyone in the whole world can think themselves masterful at anything at all, no matter any evidence otherwise.
Anyway, I just felt like telling that little story, 1robin. Not sure exactly why.
... unless it is important I do not copy and paste to word then to word pad and then here to get it perfect.
It is important. I assume you have come to this place to instruct the world in the Actual Truth of Christianity. To me, you don't seem interested in learning. You certainly don't seem to be here to work on your debate skills. So you must be here to convince others of your truth. That's my best guess.
But you aren't doing a very good job of that. Let's put aside the larger issues of good logic, serious presentation of evidence, defining terms, and other advanced debate skills. You are making me struggle to even understand your sentences.
If you want to be effective in whatever you're trying to do here, I really think you need to focus a bit on your writing. It is the tool which we use. How can you use a tool to do something while being dismissive of your tool skills? Does that seem sensible?
Devate should have been debate. I would have thought a language master could have figured that out by the context but it was my mistake.
I probably could have figured it out if I'd spent another few minutes on it, but I just don't love you enough to do that. I love you plenty, but not enough to waste too much of my valuable time trying to decipher your more obscure spellings and grammar.
Ok, I guess you learned I do not discuss trivial issues concerning college course numbering systems in long posts indefinately.
No, I learned that you will not discuss college course numbering systems at all, which I find curious and interesting.
You still have not told me what it is specifically that you are asking about. You do not build watersheds for a pond normally, they exist in nature.
I told you precisely what I'm asking about and didn't say a single world about 'building' watersheds.
Don't engineers need to be careful readers? If I asked my engineer to figure the size of a watershed for me, he would not reply that watersheds exist in nature and that I don't need to build one. He would just describe how to figure the size of a watershed. (Get a topo map. Draw a line along all the ridges from which water flows toward my pond. Calculate the area of the resulting outline. Presto: You've got the size of the watershed.)
In your defense, I will say that my experience with engineers has led me to see them as cluttered thinkers. If they can complicate a matter beyond all reason, they'll usually do so.
I was giving you a way of identifying what water sources wind up in your pond location by tracing dye.
Do you know how to use a topographical map? If so, why on earth would you use dye packs to figure the area of a watershed? I can't even understand how you could figure the area of a watershed using dyepacks. Can you explain it in small concepts and words, for a simple poet like me?
I do not answer things because they are silly, incomplete, incoherent, or I do not have time.
Yeah, it's what they all say. It's funny that most of them have plenty of time to insult my questions but no time at all to actually answer them. I think they are simply afraid of my questions. It's the best explanation I've been able to figure.
The bolded sections are new to me.
Well, they were the central focus of our earlier discussion. It's very hard for me to imagine how an attentive person could have forgotten them in such a short time. I can only conclude that you are not paying attention to our dialogue or else that your memory doesn't function as mine does.
