3RU7AL

Why else would you engage in negative commentary directed at your interlocutor ?

To make fun of them.

Why have the Germans and the Russians been killing each other for hundreds of years ?

I don't know lol

What's your point?

Not if the speaker is the topic or if the negative commentary isn't used to dismiss the speaker's arguments.

He might have even seen the airtight arguments I've made smashing shitlib anti-white narratives, and knows that if he argues straight, he's a goner.

I have met many atheists who have disgarded atheism because of an argument

Like most people on this site, you just don't understand Ad Hominem.

Have you attempted to charitably paraphrase your understanding of their position ?

He knows what my position is.

Afghan refugees should not be settled in the United States because their culture is not compatible with ours. For a fraction of the cost it takes to settle a refugee here, a refugee could be settled in Central Asia. 

Are any of the people who were attacking me in this thread going to apologize? we brought in unvetted people from a culture that for centuries has condoned violence against women and the sexual exploitation of minors, and lo and behold, they are already committing sex crimes and acts of violence against women. 

I cannot find many better examples of 'case in point' with the direct reply someone gives to an accurate callout of their methods.

In normal cases, I think definitions are a number one priority - but not so much in cases like this; because of the other persons position.

You’re foot stamping is intellectually Dishonest, inherently disingenuous and demonstrative that you do not want to engage in good faith. 

If for example, one is simply exchanging philosophical, political or religious opinion, then sources tend to be nothing more than arbitrary and secondary opinion

No, I haven't. The first two are fine, though I'd disagree with "pricing" one's initiation of a debate.

What is perfect?

(IFF) GOD = EXIST (THEN) EVERYTHING THAT EXISTS = GOD

Thanks for responding. And that is also an interesting point but not the answer to my question.

How so?

a discussion without first setting our broad areas of agreement first is not possible: again, you have not offered any rational disagreement; you have not offered any argument.

I also know the universe wasn't t created to be perfect, it is meant to experience birth, death and decay. With those features there can be no perfection. 

Sure, you'll have to give me some content to think about first. 

All concepts are imaginary. Some imaginary concepts are true, i.e. the complement existence in reality. Others imaginaries are not true ex unicorns.

3ru, you did not answer any of the questions I asked you.  Why is that? 

I do believe God exists and this is why...

BECAUSE EVERYTHING CAME FROM SOMETHING AND THAT SOMETHING IS OFTEN REFERRED TO AS "GOD" (OR NOUMENON)

There we go! you answered lol, thank you!

Do you have any other reason for your answer? or does that suffice?

Mention me in your acceptance speech, ok?

Pat yourself on the back. That's pretty good.

Have you ever gotten one of them to see the lack of logic in those concepts?

we have to start at a point of common understanding and agreement: and from there we can build up.

The three you listed aren't the only ones. Abiogenesis is another.

Look I usually don't like going back and forth in forums, do you want to debate the existence of God? 

What do you have against entertainment? : )

What could have initiated a Big Bang? 

OBVIOUSLY GOD IS REAL AND IF YOU THINK THIS WORLD IS IMPERFECT IT INDICATES THAT (EITHER) GOD IS IMPERFECT 

Go back and read the OP. 

PERFECT GOD = PERFECT WORLD

IMPERFECT WORLD = IMPERFECT GOD

What exactly is your point, what exactly is your position? what do perfection and imperfection have to do with the topic?