Should we take Ray Comfort Serious? If no, what not?
- Thread starter Jan Ardena
- Start date
It is of the same value as any word we seek to define.
We should always bear in mind what words mean. So when we're discussing the topic, we know what we're talking about.
Why not?
God is the origin of everything.
So God is the origin of truth as well.
Truth is is a quality, or state of being true.
If God is the origin of everything, God must know everything.
This is all going by definition.
You can reject it, or accept it. It makes no difference as those are the definitions.
An honest discussion would have to take everything in account. Not shift goalposts, so end up going off topic.
Last edited:
I agree, although that is not in the current definition. But it stands to reason,
God has that same quality, if you are prepared to use reason.
Again, you don't have to accept it a fact. But you should accept that we are defining God, as per definition.
I said "your definition" is of no value, not the word you're defining.
We have not agreed on that definition.
And if your definition was any good, God is also the origin of lies.
But what he's telling you might be lies.
Including the possibility that everything you think you know about God is a lie.
That isn't even coherent. We can not define God "per definition". That would be circular.
I know what you mean and it's wrong. We can not define God "as per definition". That would be circular.
But to define God.
We should use the definition. Right!
So sayeth the Holy Dictionary, the book Jan uses to confirm his beliefs in the Bible. Honest discussion, indeed.
This is (Q) mad as hell at Jan ------> Hahahahahahahaha! My sides they are a splittin'.
Speaking of failures, when are you going to understand that dictionaries don't make things real or are used as evidence for the existence of something? Never?
Of course not. You can't use a definition to make a definition. A definition has to start from a blank page.
In any case, there is no "the definition" of God.
That doesn’t even make sense.
You show logically, albeit accidentally, that God Is.
Now you’re acting like you’re having a nervous breakdown.
Was the pressure too much for you?
Did it take its toll?
Do you need a moment?
In fact, take as long as you need.
We’ll all be here when you get back.
There is no "the" definition of God.
As none of your other definitions over the years have aligned with the knowledge of the knowledgable or the dictionaries on my shelf, it seems you are not very good at defining things - a reasonable person would doubt your definition of God.
Meanwhile: According to my favorite book, and in agreement with common sense, anything that can be named or defined is limited. So if you can define your god, it isn't the god - by definition, so to speak.
So what is a reasonable definition of God?
You thought you’d back your first point up with this one, just in case it’s whack (which it is).
You’re entitled to your opinion, but the reality is that, God is defined as the origin of everything. So when we discuss God, we should use that definition, so we know what it is we’re discussing.
Last edited:
... unless it is defined as being unlimited?
Can you read at all? I'm saying that your definition is not "the" definition. It's a definition. Do you understand the difference between definite articles and indefinite articles?
Yes, we know, that's why we wonder why you continuously use that ridiculous argument.
So, by showing how ridiculous your argument, I show that God is? And, that makes sense to you?
Laughing at your absurd claims is having a nervous breakdown? So, anyone who laughs is having a nervous breakdown in your world?
Was the pressure too much for you?
Did it take its toll?
Do you need a moment?
In fact, take as long as you need.
We’ll all be here when you get back.
And, I'll still be laughing at what you say.