Theist VS atheist

[Kenny]

No, you aren't addressing his point.

You said I was on your "ignore list" why are you even talking to me?
Ken

[RickD]

Nikki, Kenny is technically correct, but it's the sort of absurd and trivial point that demonstates why he's fundamentally unserious in these discussions. Yes, abel should have worded it better. He should have said "all effects have a cause." His second portion was correct, "and all things that are caused are caused by something else." That was right. He could have just left the first five words off.

Alternativey, abel could just point out (rightly) that God isn't a thing and so his statement is correct as it stands. But none of this matters. It's all just a technical discussion of how to word abel's point. If Kenny were honest, he would address the actual point abel is making rather than arguing about the semantics. But he isn't. He's too busy playing gotcha to have a serious dialogue.

Beyond that, Nikki, you are absolutely correct in your statement about God and the uncaused cause. Well said.

I am honest, and I am addressing the point HE made. I am addressing his actual words, but what I am not doing is putting words in his mouth which is what you seem to be good at doing.
If he wishes to change his words, he can do that and I will address whatever point he chooses to make; but I am addressing his words, not yours.

Ken

Kenny,

Addressing his words isn't addressing his point. As Jac said, technically you are right, because you addressed his words. But, since he miswrote his actual point, that point went unaddressed by you.

So as usual, you aren't dealing with the point of what anyone is saying. You took the mistake that ACB wrote, and refuted that mistake. It does nothing to address what he actually meant.

[abelcainsbrother]

ALL things have a cause and all things that are caused are caused by something else and all things are willed into existence

I noticed you enunciated the word "all". Does this means this applies to God as well?

and ask them can they name anything in our world that does not apply to these facts

What about outside our world?

K

No,it does not apply to God.I know you don't believe the bible but we do not believe in a created God liked some do our God is eternal and this is even more reason to believe in him because he can create universes easy and yet you are still using your imagination to deny the facts of the reality around you.Name something in this world that does not apply to the facts because just because you reject that God is eternal does not change the facts that in our world,God is outside but can intervention if he chooses but in our world we live in ALL things have a cause and ALL things that have a cause are caused by something else and ALL things are willed into existence.An eternal God is a must because of these facts.

[Jac3510]

Abel, I agree with your point, but you would do well to tighten up your language. You cannot say ALL things require a cause and then proceed to exempt God. That commits a logical fallacy called special pleading (unless you exclude God from the definition of "thing," in which case you had better be prepared to offer a rigorous defense of that exemption). You should say, as philosophers have always said when presenting this argument, and which you yourself said in the second half of the statement Kenny challenged, that all caused things have a cause or that all effects have a cause. Not that all THINGS have a cause.

Again, you are right in your overall point and how you got there. Your language is just too loose. That wouldn't matter if people like Kenny were honest, but they aren't. He's quibbling with your words rather than your points, and you are letting him. He is committing his own logical fallacy called a red herring. The problem here is that you're waving it in his face and virtually daring him to go fishing!

Just restate your claim in tighter language.

[Jac3510]

No, you aren't addressing his point.

You said I was on your "ignore list" why are you even talking to me?
Ken

I haven't foe'd you. I can still read your posts. I just don't respond to your arguments. And I still don't, because they're worthless. I'm talking to you here, though, because you lied. And you need to be called out for lying.

[Kenny]

Nikki, Kenny is technically correct, but it's the sort of absurd and trivial point that demonstates why he's fundamentally unserious in these discussions. Yes, abel should have worded it better. He should have said "all effects have a cause." His second portion was correct, "and all things that are caused are caused by something else." That was right. He could have just left the first five words off.

Alternativey, abel could just point out (rightly) that God isn't a thing and so his statement is correct as it stands. But none of this matters. It's all just a technical discussion of how to word abel's point. If Kenny were honest, he would address the actual point abel is making rather than arguing about the semantics. But he isn't. He's too busy playing gotcha to have a serious dialogue.

Beyond that, Nikki, you are absolutely correct in your statement about God and the uncaused cause. Well said.

I am honest, and I am addressing the point HE made. I am addressing his actual words, but what I am not doing is putting words in his mouth which is what you seem to be good at doing.
If he wishes to change his words, he can do that and I will address whatever point he chooses to make; but I am addressing his words, not yours.

Ken

Kenny,

Addressing his words isn't addressing his point. As Jac said, technically you are right, because you addressed his words. But, since he miswrote his actual point, that point went unaddressed by you.

So as usual, you aren't dealing with the point of what anyone is saying. You took the mistake that ACB wrote, and refuted that mistake. It does nothing to address what he actually meant.

I was hoping I could get him to change his words to reflect exactly what he meant because the last time I addressed what I suspected a person meant rather than his exact words; I was told to address his words not what I think his words should have been. I didn’t want to make that mistake again.

I suspected his point was that everything requires a beginning except his explanation to with the obvious rebuttal is if you gonna make an exception to your explanation, you need to make an exception for mine as well; otherwise you are special pleading which only works when preaching to the choir; and there are no choir members in this conversation.

Ken

[Kenny]

ALL things have a cause and all things that are caused are caused by something else and all things are willed into existence

I noticed you enunciated the word "all". Does this means this applies to God as well?

and ask them can they name anything in our world that does not apply to these facts

What about outside our world?

K

No,it does not apply to God.I know you don't believe the bible but we do not believe in a created God liked some do our God is eternal and this is even more reason to believe in him because he can create universes easy and yet you are still using your imagination to deny the facts of the reality around you

So I am denying the "facts of reality"? What facts do you have that support your claims?

Name something in this world that does not apply to the facts.

When you say “in this world” are you referring only to plant Earth? Or am I expected to assume you meant something different (like the entire Universe) and respond to that?

Ken

[abelcainsbrother]

Nikki, Kenny is technically correct, but it's the sort of absurd and trivial point that demonstates why he's fundamentally unserious in these discussions. Yes, abel should have worded it better. He should have said "all effects have a cause." His second portion was correct, "and all things that are caused are caused by something else." That was right. He could have just left the first five words off.

Alternativey, abel could just point out (rightly) that God isn't a thing and so his statement is correct as it stands. But none of this matters. It's all just a technical discussion of how to word abel's point. If Kenny were honest, he would address the actual point abel is making rather than arguing about the semantics. But he isn't. He's too busy playing gotcha to have a serious dialogue.

Beyond that, Nikki, you are absolutely correct in your statement about God and the uncaused cause. Well said.

I am honest, and I am addressing the point HE made. I am addressing his actual words, but what I am not doing is putting words in his mouth which is what you seem to be good at doing.
If he wishes to change his words, he can do that and I will address whatever point he chooses to make; but I am addressing his words, not yours.

Ken

Kenny,

Addressing his words isn't addressing his point. As Jac said, technically you are right, because you addressed his words. But, since he miswrote his actual point, that point went unaddressed by you.

So as usual, you aren't dealing with the point of what anyone is saying. You took the mistake that ACB wrote, and refuted that mistake. It does nothing to address what he actually meant.

I was hoping I could get him to change his words to reflect exactly what he meant because the last time I addressed what I suspected a person meant rather than his exact words; I was told to address his words not what I think his words should have been. I didn’t want to make that mistake again.

I suspected his point was that everything requires a beginning except his explanation to with the obvious rebuttal is if you gonna make an exception to your explanation, you need to make an exception for mine as well; otherwise you are special pleading which only works when preaching to the choir; and there are no choir members in this conversation.


You think you got me when God is a must that you ignore in order to deny the facts.You're only admitting you'd rather live by your I imagination with nothing to base it on in order for you to doubt God is eternal.We already knew you reject the bible but it will not get you out of LA LA land,because God is a must based on the facts look around you right now and see the reality you demy.

Ken

[Kenny]

.

[abelcainsbrother]

ALL things have a cause and all things that are caused are caused by something else and all things are willed into existence

I noticed you enunciated the word "all". Does this means this applies to God as well?

and ask them can they name anything in our world that does not apply to these facts

What about outside our world?

K

No,it does not apply to God.I know you don't believe the bible but we do not believe in a created God liked some do our God is eternal and this is even more reason to believe in him because he can create universes easy and yet you are still using your imagination to deny the facts of the reality around you

So I am denying the "facts of reality"? What facts do you have that support your claims?

Name something in this world that does not apply to the facts.

When you say “in this world” are you referring only to plant Earth? Or am I expected to assume you meant something different (like the entire Universe) and respond to that?

Ken

[Kenny]

Nikki, Kenny is technically correct, but it's the sort of absurd and trivial point that demonstates why he's fundamentally unserious in these discussions. Yes, abel should have worded it better. He should have said "all effects have a cause." His second portion was correct, "and all things that are caused are caused by something else." That was right. He could have just left the first five words off.

Alternativey, abel could just point out (rightly) that God isn't a thing and so his statement is correct as it stands. But none of this matters. It's all just a technical discussion of how to word abel's point. If Kenny were honest, he would address the actual point abel is making rather than arguing about the semantics. But he isn't. He's too busy playing gotcha to have a serious dialogue.

Beyond that, Nikki, you are absolutely correct in your statement about God and the uncaused cause. Well said.

I am honest, and I am addressing the point HE made. I am addressing his actual words, but what I am not doing is putting words in his mouth which is what you seem to be good at doing.
If he wishes to change his words, he can do that and I will address whatever point he chooses to make; but I am addressing his words, not yours.

Ken

Kenny,

Addressing his words isn't addressing his point. As Jac said, technically you are right, because you addressed his words. But, since he miswrote his actual point, that point went unaddressed by you.

So as usual, you aren't dealing with the point of what anyone is saying. You took the mistake that ACB wrote, and refuted that mistake. It does nothing to address what he actually meant.

I was hoping I could get him to change his words to reflect exactly what he meant because the last time I addressed what I suspected a person meant rather than his exact words; I was told to address his words not what I think his words should have been. I didn’t want to make that mistake again.

I suspected his point was that everything requires a beginning except his explanation to with the obvious rebuttal is if you gonna make an exception to your explanation, you need to make an exception for mine as well; otherwise you are special pleading which only works when preaching to the choir; and there are no choir members in this conversation.


You think you got me when God is a must that you ignore in order to deny the facts.You're only admitting you'd rather live by your I imagination with nothing to base it on in order for you to doubt God is eternal.We already knew you reject the bible but it will not get you out of LA LA land,because God is a must based on the facts look around you right now and see the reality you demy.

Ken

You keep saying "facts"! Again; can you present some facts that support your claims?

Ken

[abelcainsbrother]

ALL things have a cause and all things that are caused are caused by something else and all things are willed into existence

I noticed you enunciated the word "all". Does this means this applies to God as well?

and ask them can they name anything in our world that does not apply to these facts

What about outside our world?

K

No,it does not apply to God.I know you don't believe the bible but we do not believe in a created God liked some do our God is eternal and this is even more reason to believe in him because he can create universes easy and yet you are still using your imagination to deny the facts of the reality around you

So I am denying the "facts of reality"? What facts do you have that support your claims?

Name something in this world that does not apply to the facts.

When you say “in this world” are you referring only to plant Earth? Or am I expected to assume you meant something different (like the entire Universe) and respond to that?

Ken

The entire cosmos is apart of our world.Let's see cups,plates,doors,hope,faith,love,fear,hurricanes,tornadoes,the sun,moon,stars,tsunamis,evolution,cans,windows,atoms,cells,buildings,houses,children,life,death,pain,pleasure,dogs,cats,horses,etc Everything. ALL things have a cause and all things that are caused are caused by something else and all things are willed into existence.And just because you choose to overlook these facts and the requirements for these facts does not mean you should use your imagination to believe things that defy logic,reason and reality,you must have God for these to be facts.

[Kenny]

ALL things have a cause and all things that are caused are caused by something else and all things are willed into existence

I noticed you enunciated the word "all". Does this means this applies to God as well?

and ask them can they name anything in our world that does not apply to these facts

What about outside our world?

K

No,it does not apply to God.I know you don't believe the bible but we do not believe in a created God liked some do our God is eternal and this is even more reason to believe in him because he can create universes easy and yet you are still using your imagination to deny the facts of the reality around you

So I am denying the "facts of reality"? What facts do you have that support your claims?

Name something in this world that does not apply to the facts.

When you say “in this world” are you referring only to plant Earth? Or am I expected to assume you meant something different (like the entire Universe) and respond to that?

Ken

The entire cosmos is apart of our world.Let's see cups,plates,doors,hope,faith,love,fear,hurricanes,tornadoes,the sun,moon,stars,tsunamis,evolution,cans,windows,atoms,cells,buildings,houses,children,life,death,pain,pleasure,dogs,cats,horses,etc Everything. ALL things have a cause and all things that are caused are caused by something else and all things are willed into existence.And just because you choose to overlook these facts and the requirements for these facts does not mean you should use your imagination to believe things that defy logic,reason and reality,you must have God for these to be facts.

Fair enough; I will assume you mean the entire Universe when you say "world". The problem with claims like these about the entire Universe, is we don't know enough about the contents of the Universe to make such a claim, and you can't assume the laws of nature that applies to the 4% of the Universe we know of, is consistent with the 96% of the Universe that we are unfamiliar with.
Now if you as a Christian believe God did it; that's fine, but you shouldn't be surprised if those who don't believe in your God have different views, unless you have some facts to back up your claims. Now you have been consistent in saying you have facts, and I keep asking for them. Unless you can provide some facts, your claims will not be taken seriously.


Ken

[RickD]

Ken wrote:

When you say “in this world” are you referring only to plant Earth? Or am I expected to assume you meant something different (like the entire Universe) and respond to that?

Ken

Ken,

I think he's referring to animal earth as well as plant earth. But what do plants have to do with anything?

[Kenny]

Ken wrote:

When you say “in this world” are you referring only to plant Earth? Or am I expected to assume you meant something different (like the entire Universe) and respond to that?

Ken

Ken,

I think he's referring to animal earth as well as plant earth. But what do plants have to do with anything?

Okay; you got me on that one. Good catch my friend!

Ken