On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 16:52:28 -0400, Al Klein <rukbat@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 07:13:03 -0700, Midjis <midwinter_m@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>wrote:
>
>>On 10 Oct, 17:33, "Bill M" <wm...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>>> A straight foreword answer means nothing. Provide me with an answer
based on
>>> objective verifiable
>>> facts and I will give it serious consideration.
>>
>>I very much doubt that, Bill. The fact is, as you and I (and quite
>>probably most other people here) know, you're not looking for
>>answers. You're looking for excuses to continue to demand answers.
Lie.
>>The "objective, verifiable facts" you constantly talk about are merely
>>a red herring, when you know - as the intelligent man you surely are -
>>that religion, faith, belief (call it what you will) has no objective
>>basis, and *needs none*.
Then they should shut the **** up.
What I don't understand is why so many theists lie about why proof is
demanded.
>It does if it claims that its god is objectively real - which
>Christianity does.
And the demands aren't for us because wouldn't give it a thought if
they didn't keep bringing it up.
They're for them - to get them to shut up when they realise they can't
put up.
It looks like midjis is halfway there.
|
