Total posts: 4,920
Posted in:
@Polytheist-Witch
Sine we know you are a hate filled POS you are a liar. You posts shit is just shit.
Like always. Instead of being informative you instead do what you always do which is ad-hom and name call. Typical.
Who is "we"?
Created:
Posted in:
@Polytheist-Witch
Don't have to prove something to have a right to believe it. You don't have to do shit so why post here all day shitting on others. Oh yeah, atheism.
Your here so it doesn't make sense because you are a theist which goes against atheists spend all day shitting on others on the site. That is if I agree he is shitting on others. You definitely do that.
Freedom hating bigots deserve to loose their freedom.
Guess you don't believe in freedom then.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Here is a quote. You can decide if it is iconic or not.
How about this:
"Yeah! Screw poor people, they dont deserve any good education system, YEAH INSTEAD OF FIXING THE PROBLEM LETS SEND OUR KIDS TO HOMESCHOOL YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
"Iconic Quotes by DARTers"
This implies either you have a DA account or these quotes are from DA. So no.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Wylted
No.Are people who are inclined to follow rules as opposed to break them just inherently bad people?
It depends on the circumstance and since there are countless rules and countless ways of looking at the rules. I just need to find one I agree with in order for people who follow the rules are good.
Created:
Posted in:
Any other positive adjective you would like to attach to God as well.
Positive adjective examples:
Good
Great
Amazing
Wonderful
Who disagrees?
Created:
Posted in:
I like Spider-Man more but since he can be considered like a spider. I am sure it counts.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@crossed
So God is not the creator of all?a bunch of nothing can not tell the difference between good and bad germs.
How could a nothing make a something?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@n8nrgmi
i don't believe this
But you believe they should bomb them "i'm not saying that america should invade iran. just bomb them."
I want to know the difference.
i do believe tthis argument is why john bolton should be on trump's military team.... just to have the someone willing to push this option so all options are on the table.
This guy?
i dont know what the odds are that iran would get a nuke and funnel it to terrorists and then not take responsibility. but it's possible if not likely.. it's a realistic situation given the way iran currently behaves. what are we suppose to do if they have nukes after theyve been arming terrorists? mutual assured destruction only works in theory, in practice it can prevent a bad actor like iran from being stopped in that sort of situation. this means we should use force if necessary, to prevent them from getting nukes. but how much force should we use?
No evidence offered so I'll wait when you do. If all you got is that Iran possibly has nukes. Then I am going to say possibly Iran doesn't have nukes. We aren't going anywhere with that.
if we don't over throw them, it would probably just delay the inevitable if iran really wanted nukes.
If Iran nukes the US. In retaliation the US would also fire nukes. This won't happen because of a thing called the Cold War.
Both the Soviet Union and the US were increasing in their military technology which created two countries trying to best each other. Neither of them really wanted to fight in direct wars instead were involved with proxy wars. The reason behind this was that if the US fires a nuke the Soviet Union will as well. Neither of them would risk such an altercation. If you don't think that is substantial then I'll say more.
There has been 2,056 nuclear tests and only 2 have been used in war.
There was 2 nuclear bombs dropped by the United States. One in Hiroshima and another in Nagasaki.
No other country apart from the US has used nukes in war and you think Iran would do it.
the reason it's inevitable, is because we will have weak presidents eventually, and iran will just take advantage of the situation. then we are at the point that they just funnel bombs to terrorists. as was argued for a reason to not bomb them, bombing them might just increase the odds of an attack from iran. so if that's a possibility, and if we might have weak presidents, that's all the more reason to overthrow them while we still can.
Many assumptions.
but, their GDP is rising exponentially, which would give them the means to fund terrorism. after all, iran was doing exactly that during the treaty that obama negotiated.
So what I am getting is since you can't prove that Iran broke the deal you now have a problem with another country doing successful. You have yet to provide evidence they are a threat. When was the last time Iran has attacked the US?
they were also insisting on three or four weeks notice for inspections, which would mean they have bad intentions because there's no good reason to not allow inspectors.
Asking for a notice means they have bad intentions. I am guessing you mean hiding the nukes. This is a false dichotomy. There are more scenarios than just that. What if they wanted to clean up in order to meet American health and safety standards or use that time to plan how they are going to show the facility? Since there is more than one way you can't conclude this and you require evidence. This is me agreeing with Iran asking for a 4-3 week notice even though you haven't given evidence.
why would we do business with iran, at the same time we are fighting terrorists? the money they get is going directly to terrorism, so we are just shooting ourselves in the foot. better to just overthrow the current regime than to let that happen, if them getting nukes and being a bad actor is inevitable.
Evidence that the war on terror works and evidence that Iran spends money on terror?
as i said, i think iran might have decent intentions at the moment, so i don't believe the above argument is best. but if we think them getting nukes is inevitable, we should do something about it now, while we have the chance. i just dont know the odds they are going to try to get nukes so this question is my main sticking point.
Whatever your point is. It requires evidence.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@crossed
Can you prove it?i am saying it came to that way because god made an intelligent choice.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@crossed
How does God know?God knew that bad bacteria was bad.
god chose to design
Where did God gain its knowledge?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RoderickSpode
The Deification Of Scientists
If scientists are treated like Gods why is there a use for peer-review? Surely a God can't be questioned in its judgement like I am sure you don't critique God's word in the Bible.
It's not aimed at specific individuals so much as a unit of scientists alleged to have no prejudices, no political influences, no ulterior motives, etc
They are scientists. Is there job to observe the natural world using axioms or use science as a way to voice their political beliefs or prejudices?
And of course they must be Darwinian evolutionists.
Yes a scientist should agree with what is accepted among scientists. It is accepted because it is the best explanation of life and contentions were not substantial enough to provide a counter to. I know you have a problem with a scientist being a scientist but I don't because that is what they do. Observe the natural world not look at books depicting a world that is not observable then stating the nothing is correct.
Your claims are lackluster and I am doubtful you can actually provide counters to scientists being God-like. I know it must be difficult to believe something without evidence but don't blame people who do. Blame yourself.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@crossed
i'm saying we can see god using making an intelligent choice in this situation.
How does God know it is intelligent? Can God verify its own intelligence?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dustandashes
Have you ruled out the possibility that this is confirmation bias?when I started seeing things in the world line up with Bible prophecy, particularly eschatology which at the time I was obsessed with.
Basically it just so happens the very thing you believed in also goes in line with what you were fond off.
Created:
Posted in:
Okay.The assumption addressed in the OP is faulty whether one believes God exists or not.
what exactly would be relevant if you assumed God exists?
Anything related to God. I am not really going to assume something like that because the information I would gather wouldn't be informative as lets say if we assume we were mindless machines for our overlords. Kind of like God but I think you would disagree.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
Yeah so basically intelligence is arbitrary for God and for God the creator to think about its very own intelligence would make everyone realize the flaw. God can't measure its own intelligence because that would mean God is more powerful to create a measurement of its intelligence. At that point God is now even more powerful so God would require to measure its new intelligence. This of course will mean God is stuck in an infinite increase of intelligence. So basically God can't exactly its own intelligence. Flaw of God added to other countless flaws.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Just apologize with the people involved. Everyone else doesn't need a reply because they are not spectating and were not impacted by what you did.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Speedrace
Oh yeah. Mine is broken. Sometimes I get messages sometimes I don't. Sometimes I receive them in my Junk folder. I thought you were talking about the bell icon.
I already spoke to debateart.com about this. It should be somewhere in platform development if you want to find it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RoderickSpode
Rejecting God existing.I may not be sure what you're asking. But, of course you have the right to reject it. What exactly are you rejecting though? That's not really clear.
If I assumed God exists then this would be relevant right?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RoderickSpode
So I have to accept the assumption that God exists to think this? How about if I reject that?
If God is powerful enough to build Universes, he should be able to communicate in a way that is not subjective to personal opinions.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RoderickSpode
There are many people, including myself, who knows what God wants us to do, because God spoke to us individually. An example of what I mean, a person on a loudspeaker we can say is effectivelycommunicating to a broader range of people than someone having to rely strictly on their voice alone. The person on the microphone's voice is enhanced enough to where people can hear them from 2 or 3 blocks away. But, he has no control as far as choosing, or limiting who he communicates with. Some people seem to think that God cannot communicate individually, or for some reason wouldn't.
Different is one is observable and another isn't. Your analogy doesn't work when a loudspeaker can be observable whereas God cannot. All you have given here is conjecture nothing tangible like the God you believe in.
Created:
-->
@Snoopy
Have you changed your position if not what is your position?Iran has 0 nuclear weapons. The United States is a militant country that has used nuclear weapons in highly populated areas and has thousands of them. How do you like those odds?
Created:
Posted in:
Mine is Neon Genesis Evangelion. Forget my earlier comment until it is removed.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
@Vader
He said pick one. Flag your comments in order to delete it. Pick one not several.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
This is a lie. You can't actually rebut my claims so you resort to lying.1.Yes
2.Belief
I knew that already. Just wanted to see if you had any evidence.
3.It doesn't mater I believe
Guess you can't actually defend what you just said instead defaulted to this.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
How? Can you make a watch?1.Wathces is different
2.He is just there
Nothing is just there. From what we know everything has a cause that isn't them yet you are making this claim without evidence.
3.Its called faith
So no evidence of the resurrection. Gotcha. Christianity are the same as fairy tales instead they are being followed by a much older demographic then what was intended for fairy tails.
Created:
-->
@n8nrgmi
So many what ifs yet I don't see evidence of Iran breaking the nuclear deal or are in the possession of nukes. I wonder why. Maybe because you don't have evidence yet you still want to murder people without the due diligence they are capable of murdering you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
1.No
So lets take another example. Watches are complicated right. But what about the watchmaker? You have already concluded life is complicated yet can't see how God is not more complicated than life. Are you saying God is simple?
2.Himself
How do you do that?
3.If it's not a ressurection,what is it
I don't know. It is not the burden of me to prove your Religion. It is your burden and yet to you have yet to fulfill. Not my problem you can't provide evidence for the very Religion you believe in.
Created:
Most lines that are drawn are, at base, arbitrary.
We weren't arguing the base. I accepted your definition of social standards and the way you argue and made an obvious claims above the base your reason is arbitrary.
That they are arbitrary does not mean that they are not also necessary.
Didn't claim that. Simply stated it was arbitrary. Yes arbitrary decisions can be necessary.
But social standards are widely perceivable and largely self-evident, and I don't intend to debate the largely self-evident.
Okay then keep your MEEP or whatever it is arbitrary.
Besides, I did offer evidence of the social standards I was referring to.Suffice it to say, there are reasons that most public access shows blur breasts out.
No sources used so no evidence. It is that clear. If you consider your not-professional opinion and lack of evidence evidence go right ahead.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
If you say life is complicated. Wouldn't the person who created life also be complicated?1.Is it not obvious
2.Yes
What caused God?
3.Fire and Penetecost, if it wasnt a ressurection,what was it
Is this a how-to guide? Have you resurrected someone with fire and penetecost or are these two random things you think would happen when a resurrection occurs?
Created:
-->
@Mharman
What is this referring to? Just have a quote of it.People get turned on by feet. Should we ban those too?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Why is life complicated?1.Why?
2.oops,I messed up no
So God must also have a cause then.
3.why was the tomb empty
I don't know but you think it is a resurrection yet you have no evidence for it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
1.No, The Bible is quite easy to read
You said life is complicated. I am simply saying the supposed creator of life is more complicated. Do you not understand that or are you going to pivot?
2.Yes
Why are you a Christian if you don't think God created life?
3.Prove how the empty tomb isn't resurrection
The burden is on you to prove that it was. You made the positive claim. I didn't. I can't disprove something that I didn't start nor do I believe in. See the problem?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
You have already stated life is complicated but wouldn't creator of life be even more complicated?1.How so?
2.Im talking about the universe and how life began
So you don't think God created it?
3.You have to prove those things
Like the resurrection which have yet to be proven. An empty tomb is an empty tomb.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
1.Life is so complicated,its not a coincidence
God is also complicated.
2.Things happen without coincidence
How about God?
3.If the tomb was empty, he ressurected
No he doesn't. It just means the body wasn't there when the tomb was opened. This can mean someone stole Jesus, he was never there or he resurrected. I have shown 3 different scenarios. Neither of them are proved. If someone stole Jesus someone would have to prove Jesus was stolen. If Jesus was never there then they would have to prove he was never there. If Jesus resurrected then someone would have to prove the resurrection actually took place. If you do it your way then my Jesus was stolen holds the same weight as Jesus resurrection if we go by anything being possible but if we go by probability mine would be easier to believe than yours because I can steal and you can't resurrect nor can any other thing in existence.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
I have yet to see a source since he is not a professional at the topic at hand. So you are lying.The evidence in Dr Franklins point proves this and debunks and liberal theory
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
1.Complications of Life
Complications of God?
2.The Universe starts somewhere and somehow
Something from something right? Creatio Ex Materia. So what something created God?
3.Jesus has been recorded as well as his execution and resurrection
His tomb is not evidence of his resurrection. A resurrection is evidence of a resurrection. This would be proven if lets say we were able to test a how-to guide on bringing people back to life or the Bible has video footage of the resurrection occurring. None of these are in the Bible.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
You are not a professional on this topic nor have you provided evidence. You have only pointed out claims and I said support them and you are saying they are supported even though all you gave me were your claims.The evidence pointed out there
Created:
-->
@Vader
Showing tits is now socially acceptable. Showing your dick or pussy is not ok
Tell that to bsh1. He has a different social standard he is abiding by if he is actually abiding by any social standard.
Created:
-->
@bsh1
From any number of social cues. I am honestly not going to get into that debate because it's far too pedantic. Suffice it to say, there are reasons that most public access shows blur breasts out.
So the very thing I am assuming will be excluded due to things you don't know how to define or demonstrate they are this way. I'll take your stance to be arbitrary then.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Any evidence institutions are limiting men's education?Schools need to be open for everyone without any bias and such things around that. Education needs to be fair, and having men be victims of crimes and suspensions and limiting their education is pure bias and just as evil as sexism
Any evidence that education was ever fair?
Created:
-->
@bsh1
How do we determine social standards?Adult content is, largely, determined by social standards.
Created: