Atheists revenge. Persecution of theists.

[kx000]

God didn't intend it to be this way, it just is. Part of the plan is free will, I made that clear. Shit is going according to God's plan. He did not intend for us to worship idols, but we do, and he will and is fixing this problem. God's only intension is to make man as he and we are.

 

[Dywyddyr]

God didn't intend it to be this way, it just is. Part of the plan is free will, I made that clear. Shit is going according to God's plan. He did not intend for us to worship idols, but we do, and he will and is fixing this problem. God's only intension is to make man as he and we are.

Still can't make your mind up?
Statement 1) God didn't intend it to be this way
Statement 2) Shit is going according to God's plan

Either it's going according to plan or it isn't.
If it is then god intended it to be this way (and thus the blame is all his).
If it isn't going according to plan then god isn't omniscient.

Statement 3) He did not intend for us to worship idols
therefore we can go against god's plan. Therefore god isn't omniscient.

Got it yet?

 

[wynn]

have i?

To the best of my knowledge.

 

[wynn]

People get emotional when I present logic?
Something wrong with the f*cking world... I always thought so.

I agree with the thrust of NMS' comment to you.

I don't think your approach is effective - and you yourself can see that it isn't, over and over again.

It even puts me on the defensive when I just read your short "Wrong" and "Supposition" and such in your replies to other people.

Many posters that you argue with are not capable to keep up with you, but you don't seem to see it or care about it.

 

[SciWriter]

I agree with the thrust of NMS' comment to you.

I don't think your approach is effective - and you yourself can see that it isn't, over and over again.

It even puts me on the defensive when I just read your short "Wrong" and "Supposition" and such in your replies to other people.

Many posters that you argue with are not capable to keep up with you, but you don't seem to see it or care about it.

It's fine; it speaks to the topic and many readers can observe the suppositions even if the poster can't and just tries to go on with unsupported declarations and pronouncements. Why let "preaching' pass?

 

[wynn]

It's fine; it speaks to the topic and many readers can observe the suppositions even if the poster can't and just tries to go on with unsupported declarations and pronouncements. Why let "preaching' pass?

It's not about "letting preaching pass," it's about being effective.

I want to see more sophistication, on both sides!

 

[SciWriter]

It's not about "letting preaching pass," it's about being effective.

I want to see more sophistication, on both sides!

There can be no sophistication is preaching, as it can’t go anywhere, meaning there is nothing else to resort to. All that can then be done is to identify it as such, time and time again. Someone will get the message, if not the continuing preacher, but the preacher will still see nothing becoming of the preach, and may eventually tire of it going nowhere. If not, then many other fence-sitters who are reachable can note the lame attempt. Now and then more is put, but need not be done a jillion times, covering each time.

 

[NietzscheHimself]

Statement 3) He did not intend for us to worship idols
therefore we can go against god's plan. Therefore god isn't omniscient.

Got it yet?

No. What part of our choosing to worship objects that aren't shaped like god, but still represent his omniscience (ie god is still part of them/ made them) as evidence god has left Only your reality for doing so. Yet you still gaurantee god to magically reappear if the person stops worshiping the idol?

 

[wynn]

There can be no sophistication is preaching, as it can’t go anywhere, meaning there is nothing else to resort to. All that can then be done is to identify it as such, time and time again. Someone will get the message, if not the continuing preacher, but the preacher will still see nothing becoming of the preach, and may eventually tire of it going nowhere. If not, then many other fence-sitters who are reachable can note the lame attempt. Now and then more is put, but need not be done a jillion times, covering each time.

Can you become more sophisticated in your approach to these discussions?

 

[NMSquirrel]

But saying "read what I wrote" should indicate that their interpretation is faulty. Especially when their responses include claims that I haven't made.

the statement 'read what i wrote' is an emotional response, it shows a frustration which is emotional.

How is one supposed to deal with people who consistently misread and misinterpret?

quit giving them stuff to misread and misquote.
It is not your responsibility to force understanding.

Agreed. Mea culpa. I presumed a minimum intelligence level for posters and obviously misjudged it by about 95 IQ points.

exaggeration. but not everyone is quick to understand..

Next time I'll try to aim my remarks to be understood by congenital morons.

this is what puts ppl on the defensive.
it does not help your point.

People get emotional when I present logic?

no, ppl get emotional when you act judgemental.

Something wrong with the f*cking world...

duh..

 

[Dywyddyr]

the statement 'read what i wrote' is an emotional response, it shows a frustration which is emotional.

A frustration? When responses include claims I didn't make?

quit giving them stuff to misread and misquote.
It is not your responsibility to force understanding.

I should just let stupidity perpetuate?

no, ppl get emotional when you act judgemental.

Correction: people, because they seem to prefer being emotional, see it as judgemental. I just stick with the logic.

 

[Dywyddyr]

I don't think your approach is effective - and you yourself can see that it isn't, over and over again.

Suggestions?

Many posters that you argue with are not capable to keep up with you, but you don't seem to see it or care about it.

I should go elsewhere?

 

[Jan Ardena]

Suggestions?


I should go elsewhere?

Stop acting like a big girls blouse, kick back
and enjoy the discussions.

You don't know everything, meaning you can learn
something from anyone.


jan.

 

[Dywyddyr]

Stop acting like a big girls blouse, kick back
and enjoy the discussions.

Big girl's blouse?
Are you, by any chance, reading something into my questions that isn't there?
Enjoy the discussions? I would, if discussion were offered (as opposed to diversion, misinterpretation, lies and sheer stupidity).

You don't know everything, meaning you can learn something from anyone.

And your point would be...?

 

[NietzscheHimself]

LOL someone says you don't know everything... you respond with "Your point"?

LOL LOL LOL

 

[Dywyddyr]

LOL someone says you don't know everything... you respond with "Your point"?

LOL LOL LOL

Of course.
When someone states the obvious without explaining why I always wonder what the point of the remark is.
Jan may as well have said "the sky is blue".
But again, what would be the point of stating it?

 

[NietzscheHimself]

Possibly another obvious answer...

 

[Dywyddyr]

Evasion again...

 

[NietzscheHimself]

As much as I hate to explain things I hope people can figure out on their own, (because I get to mess with them until they figure it out). I have a feeling you are going to have a hard time expressing this one in any meaningful or truthful manner...

What level of fallibility are you willing and able to accept?

 

[Dywyddyr]

As much as I hate to explain things I hope people can figure out on their own, (because I get to mess with them until they figure it out). I have a feeling you are going to have a hard time expressing this one in any meaningful or truthful manner...

The irony, a multiple liar discussing my truthfulness.

What level of fallibility are you willing and able to accept?

There are "levels" of fallibility?
Explain?

1) I have never claimed to be infallible or to know everything.
2) I have, throughout, presented my chain of logic.
3) At no point has that chain of logic been directly addressed, let alone refuted. You, on the other hand, have resorted to diversion, obfuscation, non-sequiturs, misinterpretation and lies.

So I'm at fault because YOU fail to address the logic itself?
:shrug:

Edit: and you are largely incoherent, you rarely say exactly what you mean, and appear to have great difficulties in doing so even when you intend to do that.