Is There A God?

[Mudda]

"Human essence ..."
Sorry if i'm too honestly blunt, but if Boss is somewhat delusional, you are completely delusional.
From what you wrote, you must live in a fantasy world, not unlike the Harry Potter world.
Not only do you not have any evidence for your claims, but you can't even define your concepts.
Dream on.
I prefer reality in our natural world.

You believe I'm delusional. Got it. Can you tell me why?

In a nutshell (pun intended), i already told you:
"Not only do you not have any evidence for your claims, but you can't even define your concepts."
Your views appear to be completely subjective.

I have tons of evidence for my claims, just none that you will accept because you have already made up your mind. I'll start with the fact that at the moment space and time were created that beings that know and create were predestined by the laws of nature to exist. I don't really know you can argue against this point as you would be arguing against your own existence, lol.

Your "evidence" is subjective with conjecture written all over it.
I'm interested in objective reality, where more than one brain perceives the same "evidence".
There are no "facts" on what happened billions of years ago, and any fantasies about creators are delusional.

Can I use something you created as evidence?

In this case you know would the maker is and that he's real. So you fail, please try again.

 

[ding]

You believe I'm delusional. Got it. Can you tell me why?

In a nutshell (pun intended), i already told you:
"Not only do you not have any evidence for your claims, but you can't even define your concepts."
Your views appear to be completely subjective.

I have tons of evidence for my claims, just none that you will accept because you have already made up your mind. I'll start with the fact that at the moment space and time were created that beings that know and create were predestined by the laws of nature to exist. I don't really know you can argue against this point as you would be arguing against your own existence, lol.

Your "evidence" is subjective with conjecture written all over it.
I'm interested in objective reality, where more than one brain perceives the same "evidence".
There are no "facts" on what happened billions of years ago, and any fantasies about creators are delusional.

Can I use something you created as evidence?

In this case you know would the maker is and that he's real. So you fail, please try again.

The proof is that you won't mock Him.

 

[Mudda]

In a nutshell (pun intended), i already told you:
"Not only do you not have any evidence for your claims, but you can't even define your concepts."
Your views appear to be completely subjective.

I have tons of evidence for my claims, just none that you will accept because you have already made up your mind. I'll start with the fact that at the moment space and time were created that beings that know and create were predestined by the laws of nature to exist. I don't really know you can argue against this point as you would be arguing against your own existence, lol.

Your "evidence" is subjective with conjecture written all over it.
I'm interested in objective reality, where more than one brain perceives the same "evidence".
There are no "facts" on what happened billions of years ago, and any fantasies about creators are delusional.

Can I use something you created as evidence?

In this case you know would the maker is and that he's real. So you fail, please try again.

The proof is that you won't mock Him.

The god of the bible is a fucking moron and anyone who follows him is a retard. But this is all self-evident stuff, nothing new. Happy?

 

[ding]

I have tons of evidence for my claims, just none that you will accept because you have already made up your mind. I'll start with the fact that at the moment space and time were created that beings that know and create were predestined by the laws of nature to exist. I don't really know you can argue against this point as you would be arguing against your own existence, lol.

Your "evidence" is subjective with conjecture written all over it.
I'm interested in objective reality, where more than one brain perceives the same "evidence".
There are no "facts" on what happened billions of years ago, and any fantasies about creators are delusional.

Can I use something you created as evidence?

In this case you know would the maker is and that he's real. So you fail, please try again.

The proof is that you won't mock Him.

The god of the bible is a fucking moron and anyone who follows him is a retard. But this is all self-evident stuff, nothing new. Happy?

That's not mocking Him. Try harder.

 

[Mudda]

Your "evidence" is subjective with conjecture written all over it.
I'm interested in objective reality, where more than one brain perceives the same "evidence".
There are no "facts" on what happened billions of years ago, and any fantasies about creators are delusional.

Can I use something you created as evidence?

In this case you know would the maker is and that he's real. So you fail, please try again.

The proof is that you won't mock Him.

The god of the bible is a fucking moron and anyone who follows him is a retard. But this is all self-evident stuff, nothing new. Happy?

That's not mocking Him. Try harder.

Like what?

 

[ding]

Can I use something you created as evidence?

In this case you know would the maker is and that he's real. So you fail, please try again.

The proof is that you won't mock Him.

The god of the bible is a fucking moron and anyone who follows him is a retard. But this is all self-evident stuff, nothing new. Happy?

That's not mocking Him. Try harder.

Like what?

You need to either insult the Holy Spirit or challenge God by taunting Him that nothing bad will happen to you. Things like that. I think it should be your new MO. I'm sure that will rile up all the Christians and make you happy. Lord knows you could use some happiness.

 

[Mudda]

In this case you know would the maker is and that he's real. So you fail, please try again.

The proof is that you won't mock Him.

The god of the bible is a fucking moron and anyone who follows him is a retard. But this is all self-evident stuff, nothing new. Happy?

That's not mocking Him. Try harder.

Like what?

You need to either insult the Holy Spirit or challenge God by taunting Him that nothing bad will happen to you. Things like that. I think it should be your new MO. I'm sure that will rile up all the Christians and make you happy. Lord knows you could use some happiness.

Sounds like a massive waste of time.

 

[yiostheoy]

In this case you know would the maker is and that he's real. So you fail, please try again.

The proof is that you won't mock Him.

The god of the bible is a fucking moron and anyone who follows him is a retard. But this is all self-evident stuff, nothing new. Happy?

That's not mocking Him. Try harder.

Like what?

You need to either insult the Holy Spirit or challenge God by taunting Him that nothing bad will happen to you. Things like that. I think it should be your new MO. I'm sure that will rile up all the Christians and make you happy. Lord knows you could use some happiness.

Who made you a missionary ??

Why don't you cut the crap ??

 

[ding]

The proof is that you won't mock Him.

The god of the bible is a fucking moron and anyone who follows him is a retard. But this is all self-evident stuff, nothing new. Happy?

That's not mocking Him. Try harder.

Like what?

You need to either insult the Holy Spirit or challenge God by taunting Him that nothing bad will happen to you. Things like that. I think it should be your new MO. I'm sure that will rile up all the Christians and make you happy. Lord knows you could use some happiness.

Who made you a missionary ??

Why don't you cut the crap ??

lol, no one. Why would you think I was being a missionary? What kind of missionary tells people that they should mock God. The fact of the matter is he won't quit following me around. I wish he would fuck off and go pester someone else. I couldn't care less what happens to him.

Now are you going to answer that question I asked you are not? Can I use something you create as evidence?

 

[PK1]

"Human essence ..."
Sorry if i'm too honestly blunt, but if Boss is somewhat delusional, you are completely delusional.
From what you wrote, you must live in a fantasy world, not unlike the Harry Potter world.
Not only do you not have any evidence for your claims, but you can't even define your concepts.
Dream on.
I prefer reality in our natural world.

You believe I'm delusional. Got it. Can you tell me why?

In a nutshell (pun intended), i already told you:
"Not only do you not have any evidence for your claims, but you can't even define your concepts."
Your views appear to be completely subjective.

I have tons of evidence for my claims, just none that you will accept because you have already made up your mind. I'll start with the fact that at the moment space and time were created that beings that know and create were predestined by the laws of nature to exist. I don't really know you can argue against this point as you would be arguing against your own existence, lol.

Your "evidence" is subjective with conjecture written all over it.
I'm interested in objective reality, where more than one brain perceives the same "evidence".
There are no "facts" on what happened billions of years ago, and any fantasies about creators are delusional.

How do you determine objective reality?
Because I can assure you there is nothing subjective in my belief that the matter and energy that you are made of was created at the time space and time came into existence. I can assure you that there is nothing subjective about my belief that the laws of nature came into existence the moment space and time were created. I can assure you that there is nothing subjective in my belief that the laws of nature predestined that being that know and create would eventually arise. What is subjective about these beliefs?

As i already indicated, objective reality is where more than one brain perceives the same "evidence". More brains the better & hopefully they're not in a Matrix .
The "laws of nature", as far as we know, were discovered & refined via objective investigations.
Any of your beliefs about how matter, time, "laws of nature" originated are subjective, unless you are a scientist (astrophysicist, etc) with compelling evidence for a theory that multiple scientific brains find plausible.
.

 

[ding]

You believe I'm delusional. Got it. Can you tell me why?

In a nutshell (pun intended), i already told you:
"Not only do you not have any evidence for your claims, but you can't even define your concepts."
Your views appear to be completely subjective.

I have tons of evidence for my claims, just none that you will accept because you have already made up your mind. I'll start with the fact that at the moment space and time were created that beings that know and create were predestined by the laws of nature to exist. I don't really know you can argue against this point as you would be arguing against your own existence, lol.

Your "evidence" is subjective with conjecture written all over it.
I'm interested in objective reality, where more than one brain perceives the same "evidence".
There are no "facts" on what happened billions of years ago, and any fantasies about creators are delusional.

How do you determine objective reality?
Because I can assure you there is nothing subjective in my belief that the matter and energy that you are made of was created at the time space and time came into existence. I can assure you that there is nothing subjective about my belief that the laws of nature came into existence the moment space and time were created. I can assure you that there is nothing subjective in my belief that the laws of nature predestined that being that know and create would eventually arise. What is subjective about these beliefs?

As i already indicated, objective reality is where more than one brain perceives the same "evidence". More brains the better & hopefully they're not in a Matrix .
The "laws of nature", as far as we know, were discovered & refined via objective investigations.
Any of your beliefs about how matter, time, "laws of nature" originated are subjective, unless you are a scientist (astrophysicist, etc) with compelling evidence for a theory that multiple scientific brains find plausible.
.

No. Objective reality is not where more than one brain perceives the same "evidence." It is possible for that to be objective reality but it is also possible for that to be group think. Objective reality is when one views an event through an unbiased lens without having a preference for an outcome or the consequences to him self.

It is not my belief how matter, time and the laws of nature originated. This is the widely accepted theory developed by science. Can you tell me what is subjective about that?

 

[ding]

You believe I'm delusional. Got it. Can you tell me why?

In a nutshell (pun intended), i already told you:
"Not only do you not have any evidence for your claims, but you can't even define your concepts."
Your views appear to be completely subjective.

I have tons of evidence for my claims, just none that you will accept because you have already made up your mind. I'll start with the fact that at the moment space and time were created that beings that know and create were predestined by the laws of nature to exist. I don't really know you can argue against this point as you would be arguing against your own existence, lol.

Your "evidence" is subjective with conjecture written all over it.
I'm interested in objective reality, where more than one brain perceives the same "evidence".
There are no "facts" on what happened billions of years ago, and any fantasies about creators are delusional.

How do you determine objective reality?
Because I can assure you there is nothing subjective in my belief that the matter and energy that you are made of was created at the time space and time came into existence. I can assure you that there is nothing subjective about my belief that the laws of nature came into existence the moment space and time were created. I can assure you that there is nothing subjective in my belief that the laws of nature predestined that being that know and create would eventually arise. What is subjective about these beliefs?

As i already indicated, objective reality is where more than one brain perceives the same "evidence". More brains the better & hopefully they're not in a Matrix .
The "laws of nature", as far as we know, were discovered & refined via objective investigations.
Any of your beliefs about how matter, time, "laws of nature" originated are subjective, unless you are a scientist (astrophysicist, etc) with compelling evidence for a theory that multiple scientific brains find plausible.
.

Can I use something you created as evidence?

 

[PK1]

In a nutshell (pun intended), i already told you:
"Not only do you not have any evidence for your claims, but you can't even define your concepts."
Your views appear to be completely subjective.

I have tons of evidence for my claims, just none that you will accept because you have already made up your mind. I'll start with the fact that at the moment space and time were created that beings that know and create were predestined by the laws of nature to exist. I don't really know you can argue against this point as you would be arguing against your own existence, lol.

Your "evidence" is subjective with conjecture written all over it.
I'm interested in objective reality, where more than one brain perceives the same "evidence".
There are no "facts" on what happened billions of years ago, and any fantasies about creators are delusional.

How do you determine objective reality?
Because I can assure you there is nothing subjective in my belief that the matter and energy that you are made of was created at the time space and time came into existence. I can assure you that there is nothing subjective about my belief that the laws of nature came into existence the moment space and time were created. I can assure you that there is nothing subjective in my belief that the laws of nature predestined that being that know and create would eventually arise. What is subjective about these beliefs?

As i already indicated, objective reality is where more than one brain perceives the same "evidence". More brains the better & hopefully they're not in a Matrix .
The "laws of nature", as far as we know, were discovered & refined via objective investigations.
Any of your beliefs about how matter, time, "laws of nature" originated are subjective, unless you are a scientist (astrophysicist, etc) with compelling evidence for a theory that multiple scientific brains find plausible.
.

No. Objective reality is not where more than one brain perceives the same "evidence." It is possible for that to be objective reality but it is also possible for that to be group think. Objective reality is when one views an event through an unbiased lens without having a preference for an outcome or the consequences to him self.

It is not my belief how matter, time and the laws of nature originated. This is the widely accepted theory developed by science. Can you tell me what is subjective about that?

I agree with your statement:
"Objective reality is when one views an event through an unbiased lens without having a preference for an outcome."
And yes, scientific theories try to be objective.

When i said "Objective reality is where more than one brain perceives the same 'evidence'" i was being fairly simplistic to differentiate an individual's own thoughts without verification vs events/data observed by multiple brains ... with relatively objective methods, as in science.

 

[PK1]

Can I use something you created as evidence?

Why don't you simply propose a claim and indicate your evidence for it.
If your evidence & logic explain the claim's details, then a corresponding belief may be valid.

 

[ding]

Can I use something you created as evidence?

Why don't you simply propose a claim and indicate your evidence for it.
If your evidence & logic explain the claim's details, then a corresponding belief may be valid.

Ok, I can use something you create as evidence. I can use it to learn things about you. Do you agree?

 

[PK1]

Can I use something you created as evidence?

Why don't you simply propose a claim and indicate your evidence for it.
If your evidence & logic explain the claim's details, then a corresponding belief may be valid.

Ok, I can use something you create as evidence. I can use it to learn things about you. Do you agree?

Do i agree?? Is this a drumroll?

Why don't you shoot? You may get 2 pts, 3 pts, or an air ball ...

 

[yiostheoy]

Why would you think I was being a missionary? What kind of missionary tells people that they should mock God. The fact of the matter is he won't quit following me around. I wish he would fuck off and go pester someone else. I couldn't care less what happens to him.

Now are you going to answer that question I asked you are not? Can I use something you create as evidence?

Him who.

Him God ??

God can be He/She/They/It.

Unless you have met Him/Her/Them/It you cannot logically say for sure which It is.

You can only guess.

I believe Moses knew, and Jesus, and Peter, James, John, Paul, and John The Baptist, and St. Mary Of Nazareth.

But not you.

 

[ding]

Can I use something you created as evidence?

Why don't you simply propose a claim and indicate your evidence for it.
If your evidence & logic explain the claim's details, then a corresponding belief may be valid.

Ok, I can use something you create as evidence. I can use it to learn things about you. Do you agree?

Do i agree?? Is this a drumroll?

Why don't you shoot? You may get 2 pts, 3 pts, or an air ball ...

lol, no, that's what people do when they are having conversations with someone. They identify things they can agree on to identify the things they don't. I made a simple statement. One that I believe is self evident that is something that everyone should know. Do you believe that things you create can be used to learn things about you? Does this question make you uncomfortable?

 

[ding]

Why would you think I was being a missionary? What kind of missionary tells people that they should mock God. The fact of the matter is he won't quit following me around. I wish he would fuck off and go pester someone else. I couldn't care less what happens to him.

Now are you going to answer that question I asked you are not? Can I use something you create as evidence?

Him who.

Him God ??

God can be He/She/They/It.

Unless you have met Him/Her/Them/It you cannot logically say for sure which It is.

You can only guess.

I believe Moses knew, and Jesus, and Peter, James, John, Paul, and John The Baptist, and St. Mary Of Nazareth.

But not you.

No. You. Can I uses something you created to learn something about you?

 

[Mudda]

Can I uses something you created to learn something about you?

You? No.