The first couple of paragraphs will explain why poker does what it does to us.

God's got no skin in the game. lol

I hate myself for adding one more post, as I know you are incapable of creating a coherent argument. Your requirement that someone must have read a book on Christian Apologetics in order to discuss the subject with you is an amateurish cop out.

I have never read a book on Alchemy because I know it is an absurd subject. I do not need to read a book to know that it is absurd as this has already been amply demonstrated. I also know that it is not possible for someone to demonstrate the validity of Alchemic science, as there is none.

On the other hand, I have also never read a book on the science behind genetically modified crops, but if a person were to review for me several of the most powerful concepts behind it I am pretty sure I could get the gist and decide whether I wanted to learn more about the subject. Anyone competent in the field of plant genetics could easily explain the subject to someone who has no familiarity with the field.


I am willing to humor your delusions if you are willing to articulate them. So, for the truly last time, assuming you have the ability, please list the 3 concepts of Christian Apologetics that appeal to you the most in that they offer proof of the validity of your religious beliefs. Please make your response coherent and supported by facts and logic.

Bonus points still apply if you can tell me why one should take Christian Apologetics seriously when some of its "scholars" use the Big Bang theory in support of Christian Apologetics and other of its scholars believe the only logical deduction that can be drawn from the Christian bible is that the Universe is 6000 years old.

I'd just like to say that we all bleed the same.

More or less anyway. There are various clotting conditions and I understand there are different blood viscocities which may make a significant difference.

You never disappoint.

Dude, gtfo with this ****. This thread is not for rational thought out arguments. You must be some sort of plant.

always 'appy to oblige

Would you like me to go and stick my head in a bucket of water?

I'd accept this as a coherent reply were it to come from Lagtight.

I will with great vigour, pleasure and joy engage anyone in the RGT Forum.

Many of the issues discussed in this thread have been or are currently being discussed in RGT.

Since this thread has become overpopulated with peabrained trolls, I'll reserve what little time and energy I have left in my Earthly existence to engaging folks on the topic of Religion ONLY in the RGT Forum henceforth.

Will still post in this Forum on Polly Ticks, of course.

Peace.

it's clear they aren't on your level Lagtight

I've done a fair amount of reading in RGT and believe you've posted better here than there. I also feel you have posted better in that forum than others who share your opinions.

Thanks. Looking forward to reading your thoughts in RGT.

Thanks. You do a good job here yourself. Unfortunately, too many people, including (especially?) the OP of this thread just wanna troll.

If I had more time and energy I'd "roll with the troll."

That is exactly why it is so sad you think we’re trolling ...
Because we don’t believe like you do , it makes our opinion void because you feel superior due to you belief that ou cant even proved it exist (God)!

But the difference is that we non believer respect what you believe and we let you do your stuff ...!

But you try impose on us your beliefs and you call yourself defender of freedom ???
Like being anti abortion and other stuff ?!? That is a religious view... you know like other countries have ....

The non believer are way more respectful of freedom of religion since we let beliefs of everyone to chose their way to live , not try to impose on others what you try to impose !

It's reasonable to want to limit your discussion to one forum, but I don't think the trolling is an issue itt.

You're not really engaging some of the posters who don't accept your premises.

But if they won't debate you where you ask then it is what it is I guess.

And I will add to MontrealCorp's point, Lagtight, as I agree with what he said.

it is rarely "trolling" you see but you may pick up on some disdain.

The disdain rightly comes from a pretense, many religious defenders put on, which is they can defend their positions with logic and facts, and then, as you often you do, they check out of the discussion whenever they feel cornered into answering beyond where their template rhetoric takes them. They then return to the same talking points again and again as if not addressed and shot down prior.

If someone wants to say 'it is my faith and it is what I choose to believe' few would take exception to that. But once they start pretending something is defensible then they better be able to provide the proof.

You and Montreal and RFlush make a good point.

I will post a short essay I wrote and posted in RGT and will link it in this thread later today.

But, I will only answer questions and objections henceforth (in this thread) regarding the short essay that I will post later today.

I will happily engage other religious arguments and topics in the RGT.

See y'all later today!

What cuepee said.

It's the nutshell

Here in the 2+2 Nuthouse.

Happy Thanksgiving, all!

I am interested in seeing this. Can you post it here?

I have to find the right link from my WordPress account. Current link shows another of my blog posts at the top which is not relevant to this thread.

Hard doing this stuff on my phone. Still don't have access to my laptop, so posting is a pain in the drain.

LOL

Happy Thanksgiving.

I am somewhat Godlike, just ask me anything only me and Google would know.

Religion is losing ground where the there is easy accessible internet. It hard not to see the flaws in organized religions when slapped with the truth over and over again.

Lagtight's understanding of the bible (YEC, creationism) is fundamentalist in nature, it relies on seeing the Bible as inerrant. A big question to fundamentalists is why they don't read and understand the Bible like the original Christians. This fundamentalist take is a modern idea (modern as far as theology goes), arising in the 1700s and cementing in the 1800s.

In my view the rise of this doctrine is not theological as much as it is cultural. It was a response to the age of enlightenment. The idea that man could find answers to the mysteries of nature was seen as an insult, so theology was wielded like a club to beat such pursuits into a pulp.

Lagtight has talked a fair bit about beauty in this discussion. And with that in mind I'll say that this war against curiosity and knowledge is the ugliest aspect of religion by far.